Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Page / 184
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 8:29:11 PM EDT
[#1]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

And if you disagree with it, the proper recourse today is to worth through the courts and the ballot box.  Not to grab a gun and threaten to kill officials.
View Quote
By Grabthar's hammer, by the sons of Worvan, you shall be avenged, but only after many decades of lawyers battling.  Make sure you pay them.

Link Posted: 4/18/2014 8:32:57 PM EDT
[#2]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Why the hell does the Fed govt control 87% of Nevada?  How does that even happen?
 
View Quote


I've explained this before, but it's a good time for a review.



When Nevada was organized as a territory back in the early 1860s, the FedGov claimed ownership of whatever land had not been already claimed by private entities.  As part of becoming a state, Nevada got a certain amount of that land as trust lands for schools, etc (4 square mile sections out of every township, IIRC).  The feds kept the rest until someone homesteaded them or bought them outright.  A lot of it was given to the Central Pacific as payment for building the Transcontinental Railroad.



This wouldn't be a problem in a state where there is plenty of water to go around; eventually, someone would homestead the land and take ownership.  Most eastern states have very little federal land for this reason.



In Nevada, the driest state in the Union, it's a big problem because most of the land has no water available and is essentially worthless.  Nevada is owned mostly by the feds because they probably couldn't give 90% of that land away unless it valuable minerals or a good aquifer underneath it.



Like most western ranchers, Bundy's ancestors claimed a small acreage near a water source for their own land, and then let their cattle loose on federal land to graze for free.  If Bundy had to run his ranch on his own land he'd never make it; too small to be profitable.  If the BLM offered to give him the land he now grazes on for free he wouldn't accept it; he couldn't graze enough cattle on that marginal land to pay the property taxes.



 
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 8:36:13 PM EDT
[#3]
"Hazardous? No. But large amount of milk spilled in a stream or pond will cause a fish kill pretty quickly by creating a bacterial bloom which strips the water of its oxygen.

Biology, how does it work?"

Are you serious or is that from a Monty Python skit?

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 8:36:46 PM EDT
[#4]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I think they came in totally unprepared. If I was planning it the area I take control of would be three time or more greater. Establish road blocks farther out. IMO a lot this spun out of their control because they did not do enough planning and did not have enough control from the start.

I could be wrong.
View Quote


So your solution to the situation is an even more heavy action against US citizens?
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 8:37:41 PM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


I'm sure that there were a lot of lessons learned, or in the process of being learned by the feds. I only hope that the People learn from it too.

The feds claim to have nearly everyone there identified, people need to figure out how they did it-I'm guessing ALPRS, and wireless/cellphone info or direct wireless connection to phones. Failing that, facial recognition with driver license photo databases will get the few that came with a buddy and didn't have a phone.

As far as the Feds go, scene management will be a lot different in the future, with less warning, and people like Mr. Bundy will be grabbed up and removed before he can get people in to help. With 600 people at this raid, the feds would have a hard time getting a 3 or 4:1 manpower advantage scouring many departments and agencies for free warm bodies-much better to get in and out quick. Lot easier to dictate the narrative that way too.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:


Exactly what I was thinking. Next time they will bring in more and have several rings of security for such an operation.

This thing exploded in a very short period of time.


Do you really think the number willing to enforce tyranny outnumber the number willing to protest it? I don't think so. I think a lot of those enforcers were duped this time. I think a lot of them will be asking more questions before they are made to look like jackasses and JBT's again. I think a lot more people would show up if needed. And you don't always need superior numbers to get your point heard. Look at the civil rights movement. Blacks were what 5-8% of the population in the US?

There are a LOT more rural landowners than faggots in this country. Usually they are too busy working and paying taxes to get all worked up over what they see as the business of someone else. But what you saw at the Bundy Ranch was people seeing that it is becoming an issue big enough for common concern. It takes a great fool to get the rural landowner demographic worked up. I can only think of a few times in our history it has happened. Once was the Revolution, the other was the civil war. Feds were smart for going home. They'd be even smarter to unfuck themselves permanently and implement changes to the land management bureaucracies that stop this ever growing land grab and railroading of rural landowners. If the Executive can't figure it out, Congress needs to make some changes. We've already established the root of the problem is laws that are too lenient and negate the entire system of governmental checks and balances regarding land use.


I think they came in totally unprepared. If I was planning it the area I take control of would be three time or more greater. Establish road blocks farther out. IMO a lot this spun out of their control because they did not do enough planning and did not have enough control from the start.

I could be wrong.


I'm sure that there were a lot of lessons learned, or in the process of being learned by the feds. I only hope that the People learn from it too.

The feds claim to have nearly everyone there identified, people need to figure out how they did it-I'm guessing ALPRS, and wireless/cellphone info or direct wireless connection to phones. Failing that, facial recognition with driver license photo databases will get the few that came with a buddy and didn't have a phone.

As far as the Feds go, scene management will be a lot different in the future, with less warning, and people like Mr. Bundy will be grabbed up and removed before he can get people in to help. With 600 people at this raid, the feds would have a hard time getting a 3 or 4:1 manpower advantage scouring many departments and agencies for free warm bodies-much better to get in and out quick. Lot easier to dictate the narrative that way too.

I don't think they will do another raid. That will really hurt the dems 14/16.
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 8:37:43 PM EDT
[#6]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Minority of the posters voting in GD.  Certainly not the minority of Americans.

But I think it's interesting that you apparently think our electoral and judiciary are unusable and yet all you do about it is to sit behind a keyboard and whine.  Very telling.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Snips, please read this.  Then reread it.  Then reread it.


Then in a glimmer of hope, I pray you still have some common sense left.  Then tell me if this makes sense to you?  Is this common sense?

Can you tell me that "We the People" are not being REGULATED to death?

Is it legal? Yep.


Is it right? Just because somebody voted for it doesn't make it right.


 


And if you disagree with it, the proper recourse today is to worth through the courts and the ballot box.  Not to grab a gun and threaten to kill officials.


http://mrwgifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Ray-Liotta-Laughing-In-Goodfellas-Gif.gif

Absolutely, because those courts and representatives these days are impartial and have no agenda.
That's an opinion, and fortunately, the minority.

God, you are fucking amazing! I was little disappointed when I found out that staff wasn't letting Dave_A back into GD, but damn son, you are filling those shoes wonderfully.


Minority of the posters voting in GD.  Certainly not the minority of Americans.

But I think it's interesting that you apparently think our electoral and judiciary are unusable and yet all you do about it is to sit behind a keyboard and whine.  Very telling.


The opinion of MSM and the gov. does not speak for the people, no matter how erect you get believing that. You're not here to stoke a reasonable debate, you're here to troll.
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 8:41:30 PM EDT
[#7]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


"Hazardous? No. But large amount of milk spilled in a stream or pond will cause a fish kill pretty quickly by creating a bacterial bloom which strips the water of its oxygen.



Biology, how does it work?"



Are you serious or is that from a Monty Python skit?



Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
View Quote


Biochemical Oxygen Demand.



Milk has a very high BOD; milk proteins, lactose, fats are all delicious to bacteria.  Pour several thousand gallons in your favorite fishing pond and watch what happens in a few days.



 
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 8:51:49 PM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


The opinion of MSM and the gov. does not speak for the people, no matter how erect you get believing that. You're not here to stoke a reasonable debate, you're here to troll.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Snips, please read this.  Then reread it.  Then reread it.


Then in a glimmer of hope, I pray you still have some common sense left.  Then tell me if this makes sense to you?  Is this common sense?

Can you tell me that "We the People" are not being REGULATED to death?

Is it legal? Yep.


Is it right? Just because somebody voted for it doesn't make it right.


 


And if you disagree with it, the proper recourse today is to worth through the courts and the ballot box.  Not to grab a gun and threaten to kill officials.


http://mrwgifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Ray-Liotta-Laughing-In-Goodfellas-Gif.gif

Absolutely, because those courts and representatives these days are impartial and have no agenda.
That's an opinion, and fortunately, the minority.

God, you are fucking amazing! I was little disappointed when I found out that staff wasn't letting Dave_A back into GD, but damn son, you are filling those shoes wonderfully.


Minority of the posters voting in GD.  Certainly not the minority of Americans.

But I think it's interesting that you apparently think our electoral and judiciary are unusable and yet all you do about it is to sit behind a keyboard and whine.  Very telling.


The opinion of MSM and the gov. does not speak for the people, no matter how erect you get believing that. You're not here to stoke a reasonable debate, you're here to troll.


And internet forum polls are not indicative of the American public, no matter how much they agree with you.  I thought that was one of the basic rules of the internet that everyone knew by now?
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 8:57:39 PM EDT
[#9]
I found this series of documents that some of us here should take a look at to learn something about the agencies and the people behind them.

Let me add a XXX warning for the TLDR crowd. This lady is a Environmental Lawyer for the good guys.

First link is about Freedom of Information Act Abuse. A tool that the Left uses against us constantly. You will need a drink after you read it.

http://buddfalen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/6.25.13-Freedom-of-Information-Act-Abuse.pdf


The second link is about how certain agencies are covering up collusion with the enviro's. and their lawyers and making some good taxpayer money while saving Gaia. I knew about this but never realized how widespread it was.

http://buddfalen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/5.29.13-Another-Federal-Government-Cover-Up.pdf
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 9:06:10 PM EDT
[#10]
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 9:20:22 PM EDT
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Indeed.  One of the best I've ever read.  Ever.  Bravo, Repairman_Jack!!  
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
.  


Great post.

Indeed.  One of the best I've ever read.  Ever.  Bravo, Repairman_Jack!!  


No kiddin'! Facts!
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 9:21:05 PM EDT
[#12]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Actually the opposite.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:


Quoted:



I think they came in totally unprepared. If I was planning it the area I take control of would be three time or more greater. Establish road blocks farther out. IMO a lot this spun out of their control because they did not do enough planning and did not have enough control from the start.



I could be wrong.





So your solution to the situation is an even more heavy action against US citizens?




Actually the opposite.


Restriction of freedom of movement, I mean perimeter CONTROL.





Thats the already problem that is boiling this frog. We are supposed to control the out of control .gov. They have out lawed, out regulated and hired guns to enforce the mandates of the crown.



Reread the Emancipation Proclamation and see how many parts of that apply to today.



This aint about cows. You aint seen bad yet, but its coming. I wont let my children be slaves, so help me God.
 
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 9:24:14 PM EDT
[#13]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3grXMAH1vyg[/youtube]
Something to watch you may find this talk interesting. it touches on ranching. It's long but it may interest you.

Link Posted: 4/18/2014 9:32:12 PM EDT
[#14]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Actually the opposite.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

I think they came in totally unprepared. If I was planning it the area I take control of would be three time or more greater. Establish road blocks farther out. IMO a lot this spun out of their control because they did not do enough planning and did not have enough control from the start.

I could be wrong.


So your solution to the situation is an even more heavy action against US citizens?


Actually the opposite.


Not going to lie, I only caught that one post of yours so I didn't get the full gist of what your trying to say.
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 9:57:36 PM EDT
[#15]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I don't think they will do another raid. That will really hurt the dems 14/16.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:


Exactly what I was thinking. Next time they will bring in more and have several rings of security for such an operation.

This thing exploded in a very short period of time.


Do you really think the number willing to enforce tyranny outnumber the number willing to protest it? I don't think so. I think a lot of those enforcers were duped this time. I think a lot of them will be asking more questions before they are made to look like jackasses and JBT's again. I think a lot more people would show up if needed. And you don't always need superior numbers to get your point heard. Look at the civil rights movement. Blacks were what 5-8% of the population in the US?

There are a LOT more rural landowners than faggots in this country. Usually they are too busy working and paying taxes to get all worked up over what they see as the business of someone else. But what you saw at the Bundy Ranch was people seeing that it is becoming an issue big enough for common concern. It takes a great fool to get the rural landowner demographic worked up. I can only think of a few times in our history it has happened. Once was the Revolution, the other was the civil war. Feds were smart for going home. They'd be even smarter to unfuck themselves permanently and implement changes to the land management bureaucracies that stop this ever growing land grab and railroading of rural landowners. If the Executive can't figure it out, Congress needs to make some changes. We've already established the root of the problem is laws that are too lenient and negate the entire system of governmental checks and balances regarding land use.


I think they came in totally unprepared. If I was planning it the area I take control of would be three time or more greater. Establish road blocks farther out. IMO a lot this spun out of their control because they did not do enough planning and did not have enough control from the start.

I could be wrong.


I'm sure that there were a lot of lessons learned, or in the process of being learned by the feds. I only hope that the People learn from it too.

The feds claim to have nearly everyone there identified, people need to figure out how they did it-I'm guessing ALPRS, and wireless/cellphone info or direct wireless connection to phones. Failing that, facial recognition with driver license photo databases will get the few that came with a buddy and didn't have a phone.

As far as the Feds go, scene management will be a lot different in the future, with less warning, and people like Mr. Bundy will be grabbed up and removed before he can get people in to help. With 600 people at this raid, the feds would have a hard time getting a 3 or 4:1 manpower advantage scouring many departments and agencies for free warm bodies-much better to get in and out quick. Lot easier to dictate the narrative that way too.

I don't think they will do another raid. That will really hurt the dems 14/16.


I wasn't speaking to another raid on the Bundy's specifically, but against We The People in a different venue.

I too am leaning on the idea that Bundy's troubles are over with the .gov for now. The thing is, Reid is tarred and feathered with this and will probably not survive another election in his home state-raiding the ranch again won't make or break him. BUT...... Those agencies answer to and work for the administration and there had to be some tacit approval for what was to happen to the Bundy's. If there were Billions of dollars to be made, someone in the administration would have been there with their hands out before they gave the go-ahead to send BLM in heavy. If Reid and Obama's crimes were truly shown to the public, there won't be another Dem in office for many elections. As it is now, Darryl Issa is opening an investigation that will if nothing else make sure it's an issue come time to vote.
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 9:58:24 PM EDT
[#16]
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 10:00:00 PM EDT
[#17]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History


That right there is the problem with nonviolence when you don't control the media
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 10:37:55 PM EDT
[#18]
Short video for a change.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDouNtnR_IA
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 10:50:47 PM EDT
[#19]
I'll be the first to say it....  I'd hit it....



According to comments on facebook, the service is down right now.
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 11:05:53 PM EDT
[#20]
I thought all government vehicles come thru GSA and have plated that say US government?

Why did some BLM vehicles have Oregon plates?

Link Posted: 4/18/2014 11:10:13 PM EDT
[#21]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I've explained this before, but it's a good time for a review.

When Nevada was organized as a territory back in the early 1860s, the FedGov claimed ownership of whatever land had not been already claimed by private entities.  As part of becoming a state, Nevada got a certain amount of that land as trust lands for schools, etc (4 square mile sections out of every township, IIRC).  The feds kept the rest until someone homesteaded them or bought them outright.  A lot of it was given to the Central Pacific as payment for building the Transcontinental Railroad.

This wouldn't be a problem in a state where there is plenty of water to go around; eventually, someone would homestead the land and take ownership.  Most eastern states have very little federal land for this reason.

In Nevada, the driest state in the Union, it's a big problem because most of the land has no water available and is essentially worthless.  Nevada is owned mostly by the feds because they probably couldn't give 90% of that land away unless it valuable minerals or a good aquifer underneath it.

Like most western ranchers, Bundy's ancestors claimed a small acreage near a water source for their own land, and then let their cattle loose on federal land to graze for free.  If Bundy had to run his ranch on his own land he'd never make it; too small to be profitable.  If the BLM offered to give him the land he now grazes on for free he wouldn't accept it; he couldn't graze enough cattle on that marginal land to pay the property taxes.
 
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Why the hell does the Fed govt control 87% of Nevada?  How does that even happen?



 

I've explained this before, but it's a good time for a review.

When Nevada was organized as a territory back in the early 1860s, the FedGov claimed ownership of whatever land had not been already claimed by private entities.  As part of becoming a state, Nevada got a certain amount of that land as trust lands for schools, etc (4 square mile sections out of every township, IIRC).  The feds kept the rest until someone homesteaded them or bought them outright.  A lot of it was given to the Central Pacific as payment for building the Transcontinental Railroad.

This wouldn't be a problem in a state where there is plenty of water to go around; eventually, someone would homestead the land and take ownership.  Most eastern states have very little federal land for this reason.

In Nevada, the driest state in the Union, it's a big problem because most of the land has no water available and is essentially worthless.  Nevada is owned mostly by the feds because they probably couldn't give 90% of that land away unless it valuable minerals or a good aquifer underneath it.

Like most western ranchers, Bundy's ancestors claimed a small acreage near a water source for their own land, and then let their cattle loose on federal land to graze for free.  If Bundy had to run his ranch on his own land he'd never make it; too small to be profitable.  If the BLM offered to give him the land he now grazes on for free he wouldn't accept it; he couldn't graze enough cattle on that marginal land to pay the property taxes.
 

I think I found the problem.
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 11:11:30 PM EDT
[#22]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I'll be the first to say it....  I'd hit it....

http://i.imgur.com/xT5mM6m.jpg

According to comments on facebook, the service is down right now.
View Quote



Where did this originate?

Seems like a quick way to register a bunch of "domestic terrorists."
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 11:19:36 PM EDT
[#23]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Where did this originate?

Seems like a quick way to register a bunch of "domestic terrorists."
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'll be the first to say it....  I'd hit it....

http://i.imgur.com/xT5mM6m.jpg

According to comments on facebook, the service is down right now.



Where did this originate?

Seems like a quick way to register a bunch of "domestic terrorists."


Bundy's facebook page.  Thats the Bundy daughter.

Bundy Ranch Facebook Page
Link Posted: 4/18/2014 11:31:41 PM EDT
[#24]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Do I think the next time the .gov does something like this will the initial response be greater? Yes. They won't let armed protesters get the  high ground on their agents again.
View Quote


I agree with everything you said but this last part has made me think about something. I would like to hear what you have to think about it.

I think that picture of the rifleman on the overpass is going to change things. I mean this in the context of all the different Federal agencies that have tactical teams that would be put in a situation where they would end up encountering protesters and local/state police agencies that would encounter protesters. Especially protesters in states where the police would be enforcing laws that aren't very pro freedom like New York and Connecticut for example.

Maybe it caused some discussion at your own department, but I was mainly thinking about agencies that will have to make the kinds of moves I alluded to above.

I think that picture of the guy on the overpass caused alot of agents/officers to have an "oh shit" moment.

They may openly chuckle at the "neckbeard militiamen" but they also know that the Saiga goes "bang" just like their M4 and that they shoot the same kind of bullets.

When the BLM returns to the ranch and aforementioned agencies are put up against protesters in the future they will, understandably (at least to an extent), deploy in a very aggressive manner. I'm not addressing this from a "the serfs must recognize muh authoritah!" angle, but rather the idea that "There will be people there who will have guns that aren't on my side."

And this is where I see things going bad and someone getting shot.

It may be a situation like the one we just saw: armed protester show up and square off with agents/police. One side will end up shooting at the other and things will get out of hand from there.


           
My greater concern is what I think will be the most likely outcome/situation: an unarmed protestor getting shot.

There would be a lot of variables on both sides of such an incident.

For example, is the protester an actual innocent person protesting or are they someone trying to draw out a response from the police (Alex Jones/Adam Kokesh types).

Likewise is the police officer someone who has a negligent discharge (more guns increases the odds), doesn't really care for the protesters, or (what I think most likely to happen) an officer who sees a gunman behind every single rock and shoots out of a perceived furtive movement.


Link Posted: 4/19/2014 12:42:28 AM EDT
[#25]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I've explained this before, but it's a good time for a review.

When Nevada was organized as a territory back in the early 1860s, the FedGov claimed ownership of whatever land had not been already claimed by private entities.  As part of becoming a state, Nevada got a certain amount of that land as trust lands for schools, etc (4 square mile sections out of every township, IIRC).  The feds kept the rest until someone homesteaded them or bought them outright.  A lot of it was given to the Central Pacific as payment for building the Transcontinental Railroad.

This wouldn't be a problem in a state where there is plenty of water to go around; eventually, someone would homestead the land and take ownership.  Most eastern states have very little federal land for this reason.

In Nevada, the driest state in the Union, it's a big problem because most of the land has no water available and is essentially worthless.
 
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Why the hell does the Fed govt control 87% of Nevada?  How does that even happen?



 

I've explained this before, but it's a good time for a review.

When Nevada was organized as a territory back in the early 1860s, the FedGov claimed ownership of whatever land had not been already claimed by private entities.  As part of becoming a state, Nevada got a certain amount of that land as trust lands for schools, etc (4 square mile sections out of every township, IIRC).  The feds kept the rest until someone homesteaded them or bought them outright.  A lot of it was given to the Central Pacific as payment for building the Transcontinental Railroad.

This wouldn't be a problem in a state where there is plenty of water to go around; eventually, someone would homestead the land and take ownership.  Most eastern states have very little federal land for this reason.

In Nevada, the driest state in the Union, it's a big problem because most of the land has no water available and is essentially worthless.
 


If the land is worthless, why does it need Federal management?

Will it stop being worthless if they don't tend to its worthlessness?

Worth enough for them to demand taxes/fees for its use, it seems.


You still haven't articulated a reason the Federal government should own 87% of Nevada, rather than Nevada owning Nevada. The State of Nevada can't handle a bunch of worthless nothing?
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 12:52:11 AM EDT
[#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


I agree with everything you said but this last part has made me think about something. I would like to hear what you have to think about it.

I think that picture of the rifleman on the overpass is going to change things. I mean this in the context of all the different Federal agencies that have tactical teams that would be put in a situation where they would end up encountering protesters and local/state police agencies that would encounter protesters. Especially protesters in states where the police would be enforcing laws that aren't very pro freedom like New York and Connecticut for example.

Maybe it caused some discussion at your own department, but I was mainly thinking about agencies that will have to make the kinds of moves I alluded to above.

I think that picture of the guy on the overpass caused alot of agents/officers to have an "oh shit" moment.

They may openly chuckle at the "neckbeard militiamen" but they also know that the Saiga goes "bang" just like their M4 and that they shoot the same kind of bullets.

When the BLM returns to the ranch and aforementioned agencies are put up against protesters in the future they will, understandably (at least to an extent), deploy in a very aggressive manner. I'm not addressing this from a "the serfs must recognize muh authoritah!" angle, but rather the idea that "There will be people there who will have guns that aren't on my side."

And this is where I see things going bad and someone getting shot.

It may be a situation like the one we just saw: armed protester show up and square off with agents/police. One side will end up shooting at the other and things will get out of hand from there.


           
My greater concern is what I think will be the most likely outcome/situation: an unarmed protestor getting shot.

There would be a lot of variables on both sides of such an incident.

For example, is the protester an actual innocent person protesting or are they someone trying to draw out a response from the police (Alex Jones/Adam Kokesh types).

Likewise is the police officer someone who has a negligent discharge (more guns increases the odds), doesn't really care for the protesters, or (what I think most likely to happen) an officer who sees a gunman behind every single rock and shoots out of a perceived furtive movement.


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Do I think the next time the .gov does something like this will the initial response be greater? Yes. They won't let armed protesters get the  high ground on their agents again.


I agree with everything you said but this last part has made me think about something. I would like to hear what you have to think about it.

I think that picture of the rifleman on the overpass is going to change things. I mean this in the context of all the different Federal agencies that have tactical teams that would be put in a situation where they would end up encountering protesters and local/state police agencies that would encounter protesters. Especially protesters in states where the police would be enforcing laws that aren't very pro freedom like New York and Connecticut for example.

Maybe it caused some discussion at your own department, but I was mainly thinking about agencies that will have to make the kinds of moves I alluded to above.

I think that picture of the guy on the overpass caused alot of agents/officers to have an "oh shit" moment.

They may openly chuckle at the "neckbeard militiamen" but they also know that the Saiga goes "bang" just like their M4 and that they shoot the same kind of bullets.

When the BLM returns to the ranch and aforementioned agencies are put up against protesters in the future they will, understandably (at least to an extent), deploy in a very aggressive manner. I'm not addressing this from a "the serfs must recognize muh authoritah!" angle, but rather the idea that "There will be people there who will have guns that aren't on my side."

And this is where I see things going bad and someone getting shot.

It may be a situation like the one we just saw: armed protester show up and square off with agents/police. One side will end up shooting at the other and things will get out of hand from there.


           
My greater concern is what I think will be the most likely outcome/situation: an unarmed protestor getting shot.

There would be a lot of variables on both sides of such an incident.

For example, is the protester an actual innocent person protesting or are they someone trying to draw out a response from the police (Alex Jones/Adam Kokesh types).

Likewise is the police officer someone who has a negligent discharge (more guns increases the odds), doesn't really care for the protesters, or (what I think most likely to happen) an officer who sees a gunman behind every single rock and shoots out of a perceived furtive movement.




All it would have taken is ONE ND last week (from either side) and it would have been on.
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 1:03:01 AM EDT
[#27]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
All it would have taken is ONE ND last week (from either side) and it would have been on.
View Quote


Without a doubt. I was thinking about what the future holds.


I think the odds really went up once the BLM realized there were quite a few dudes with rifles in the hills.

I can't imagine what they thought other than "FUUUUUUUUU"
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 1:06:44 AM EDT
[#28]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Without a doubt. I was thinking about what the future holds.


I think the odds really went up once the BLM realized there were quite a few dudes with rifles in the hills.

I can't imagine what they thought other than "FUUUUUUUUU"
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
All it would have taken is ONE ND last week (from either side) and it would have been on.


Without a doubt. I was thinking about what the future holds.


I think the odds really went up once the BLM realized there were quite a few dudes with rifles in the hills.

I can't imagine what they thought other than "FUUUUUUUUU"


I don't think they realize that a large portion of Bundy supporters out there are trained combat vets of several wars, and they don't run from small arms fire very easily.
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 2:00:41 AM EDT
[#29]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Most kids growing up in an urban environment have very limited exposure or opportunity to experience these things on a daily basis...and that's really a shame.  It's been the core reason for America's success.  
When these kids become adults and enter the workforce, there aren't as many "tools in their toolbox" to deal with work in general and life in particular.    
They are self-centered, lazy, defeatist in adversity, unreliable, and always looking for the easy way out...or someone to do if for them.  Is it any wonder the FSA grows year by year, generation by generation.  

And therein lies the problem.  Urbanites look upon the farm community with incredulity and shock.  They don't understand, because they have no frame of reference from which they can possibly understand.  
Pray that "FO Time" is a long, long way off.  Pray that it never comes at all.  
Because on that day, when the lights go out and the infrastructure grinds to a halt; they will look at one another in their in their concrete jungle and they will understand...that it is too late for them.  
View Quote

I agree with what you're saying but I don't think it's impossible to get those same qualities away from the farm.

The problem is not farm vs. urban - it's that kids aren't encouraged to learn to do things for themselves. Many have everything done for them and are never especially challenged. Those that aren't hand-held through their childhood and have to go do things for themselves often lack someone to provide the guiding nudges needed to keep them on the right path and they end up teaching themselves how to fight and steal.

I've grown up as someone that does everything for himself not because I had to (didn't grow up on a farm, wasn't poor) but because that's the example I was set. I taught myself all about IT, cars, metalwork, etc. with nudges in the right direct from my family when needed but never hand-holding.

The problem we have is that when a generation loses those skills it becomes much harder for subsequent generations. The kids grow up thinking that it's normal to pay someone to fix your car, decorate your house, remove the viruses from your PC. This has also lead to a decline in practical hobbies and in the watering down of organisations like the scouts, both of which were alternative sources for learning new skills. The internet has provided a second chance though - there is now a support network available beyond family and friends. The difficulty is in getting youngsters to try in the first place.
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 2:15:01 AM EDT
[#30]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:]
I don't think they realize that a large portion of Bundy supporters out there are trained combat vets of several wars, and they don't run from small arms fire very easily.
View Quote


That would surprising to me if that was the case. Do you think they thought they would face a bunch of neckbeards?
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 2:31:11 AM EDT
[#31]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:





Biochemical Oxygen Demand.



Milk has a very high BOD; milk proteins, lactose, fats are all delicious to bacteria.  Pour several thousand gallons in your favorite fishing pond and watch what happens in a few days.

 
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:

"Hazardous? No. But large amount of milk spilled in a stream or pond will cause a fish kill pretty quickly by creating a bacterial bloom which strips the water of its oxygen.



Biology, how does it work?"



Are you serious or is that from a Monty Python skit?



Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


Biochemical Oxygen Demand.



Milk has a very high BOD; milk proteins, lactose, fats are all delicious to bacteria.  Pour several thousand gallons in your favorite fishing pond and watch what happens in a few days.

 




And you can die if you ingest too much water.





I guess water is now Hazardous, oh wait.  



http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/25/epa-clean-water-rule-could-extend-agencys-reach-over-private-property/



So maybe it's not about the milk, or the water?  Maybe it's about the control.
 
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 2:33:44 AM EDT
[#32]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


I found this series of documents that some of us here should take a look at to learn something about the agencies and the people behind them.



Let me add a XXX warning for the TLDR crowd. This lady is a Environmental Lawyer for the good guys.



First link is about Freedom of Information Act Abuse. A tool that the Left uses against us constantly. You will need a drink after you read it.



http://buddfalen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/6.25.13-Freedom-of-Information-Act-Abuse.pdf





The second link is about how certain agencies are covering up collusion with the enviro's. and their lawyers and making some good taxpayer money while saving Gaia. I knew about this but never realized how widespread it was.



http://buddfalen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/5.29.13-Another-Federal-Government-Cover-Up.pdf

View Quote




Made links hot.



 
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 2:35:58 AM EDT
[#33]


Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3grXMAH1vyg


Something to watch you may find this talk interesting. it touches on ranching. It's long but it may interest you.





View Quote




 
 
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 2:38:41 AM EDT
[#34]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:





I think I found the problem.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:


Quoted:



Why the hell does the Fed govt control 87% of Nevada?  How does that even happen?
 


I've explained this before, but it's a good time for a review.



When Nevada was organized as a territory back in the early 1860s, the FedGov claimed ownership of whatever land had not been already claimed by private entities.  As part of becoming a state, Nevada got a certain amount of that land as trust lands for schools, etc (4 square mile sections out of every township, IIRC).  The feds kept the rest until someone homesteaded them or bought them outright.  A lot of it was given to the Central Pacific as payment for building the Transcontinental Railroad.



This wouldn't be a problem in a state where there is plenty of water to go around; eventually, someone would homestead the land and take ownership.  Most eastern states have very little federal land for this reason.



In Nevada, the driest state in the Union, it's a big problem because most of the land has no water available and is essentially worthless.  Nevada is owned mostly by the feds because they probably couldn't give 90% of that land away unless it valuable minerals or a good aquifer underneath it.



Like most western ranchers, Bundy's ancestors claimed a small acreage near a water source for their own land, and then let their cattle loose on federal land to graze for free.  If Bundy had to run his ranch on his own land he'd never make it; too small to be profitable.  If the BLM offered to give him the land he now grazes on for free he wouldn't accept it; he couldn't graze enough cattle on that marginal land to pay the property taxes.

 


I think I found the problem.




If you've ever owned any land at all.  That can be a very big thing.
 
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 2:41:50 AM EDT
[#35]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
If the land is worthless, why does it need Federal management?



Will it stop being worthless if they don't tend to its worthlessness?



Worth enough for them to demand taxes/fees for its use, it seems.





You still haven't articulated a reason the Federal government should own 87% of Nevada, rather than Nevada owning Nevada. The State of Nevada can't handle a bunch of worthless nothing?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:


Quoted:



Why the hell does the Fed govt control 87% of Nevada?  How does that even happen?
 


I've explained this before, but it's a good time for a review.



When Nevada was organized as a territory back in the early 1860s, the FedGov claimed ownership of whatever land had not been already claimed by private entities.  As part of becoming a state, Nevada got a certain amount of that land as trust lands for schools, etc (4 square mile sections out of every township, IIRC).  The feds kept the rest until someone homesteaded them or bought them outright.  A lot of it was given to the Central Pacific as payment for building the Transcontinental Railroad.



This wouldn't be a problem in a state where there is plenty of water to go around; eventually, someone would homestead the land and take ownership.  Most eastern states have very little federal land for this reason.



In Nevada, the driest state in the Union, it's a big problem because most of the land has no water available and is essentially worthless.

 




If the land is worthless, why does it need Federal management?



Will it stop being worthless if they don't tend to its worthlessness?



Worth enough for them to demand taxes/fees for its use, it seems.





You still haven't articulated a reason the Federal government should own 87% of Nevada, rather than Nevada owning Nevada. The State of Nevada can't handle a bunch of worthless nothing?




Oh crap, I totally missed that part.







Very good man!
 
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 3:15:28 AM EDT
[#36]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


I go with lesson learned. Contract security with QRF's. It could be done.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

I think they came in totally unprepared. If I was planning it the area I take control of would be three time or more greater. Establish road blocks farther out. IMO a lot this spun out of their control because they did not do enough planning and did not have enough control from the start.

I could be wrong.


You need to look at the size of the area. There are dirt roads. Every wash is also used as a road. There are plenty of ways in, even from the Arizona side. They would have needed hundreds of people to try and secure every road.


I go with lesson learned. Contract security with QRF's. It could be done.


And this type of militarization for a cattle round up, over unpaid taxes/fees is what justifies this? The feds escalated this first. Again right or wrong on Bundy, the Shock and Awe tactics of our government is what is out of hand. If LEO and those in a similar position don't start thinking of the image they present instead of acting all military and tactical, then it just shows what gun confiscation will look like.


Link Posted: 4/19/2014 3:22:28 AM EDT
[#37]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Restriction of freedom of movement, I mean perimeter CONTROL.

Thats the already problem that is boiling this frog. We are supposed to control the out of control .gov. They have out lawed, out regulated and hired guns to enforce the mandates of the crown.

Reread the Emancipation Proclamation and see how many parts of that apply to today.

This aint about cows. You aint seen bad yet, but its coming. I wont let my children be slaves, so help me God.
View Quote

Amen, brother.
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 3:25:16 AM EDT
[#38]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
All it would have taken is ONE ND last week (from either side) and it would have been on.
View Quote

Or one pepperball.
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 3:25:16 AM EDT
[#39]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
All it would have taken is ONE ND last week (from either side) and it would have been on.
View Quote

Or one pepperball.
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 3:28:26 AM EDT
[#40]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I am too
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So, homeboy is upset because he cant let his cattle graze on land he doesn't own??  

What am I missing?



The Consitutional authority for the federal governemnt to own or control land that isn't the national capital, a military base, a custom house, or a court.


So all national parks are illigitemate then?


I'm ok with this.

I am too


The states could make so much if we turned those national parks to housing developments.
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 3:51:29 AM EDT
[#41]
The only way the Feds can bring enough soldiers in and get the drop on the ranchers is to use the Air Cav, and it's going to end up looking something like this.

Apocalypse Cow
 

 
 
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 3:53:56 AM EDT
[#42]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Or one pepperball.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
All it would have taken is ONE ND last week (from either side) and it would have been on.

Or one pepperball.

Or a double tapped pepperball.
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 4:12:55 AM EDT
[#43]
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 4:20:54 AM EDT
[#44]
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 4:28:31 AM EDT
[#45]

On Thursday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called supporters of the Bundy ranch "domestic terrorists" and questioned their patriotism. Country music star Charlie Daniels responded the same day with a tweet saying Reid should be in jail for "impersonating an American."





Link Posted: 4/19/2014 4:40:24 AM EDT
[#46]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Made links hot.
 
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
I found this series of documents that some of us here should take a look at to learn something about the agencies and the people behind them.

Let me add a XXX warning for the TLDR crowd. This lady is a Environmental Lawyer for the good guys.

First link is about Freedom of Information Act Abuse. A tool that the Left uses against us constantly. You will need a drink after you read it.

http://buddfalen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/6.25.13-Freedom-of-Information-Act-Abuse.pdf


The second link is about how certain agencies are covering up collusion with the enviro's. and their lawyers and making some good taxpayer money while saving Gaia. I knew about this but never realized how widespread it was.

http://buddfalen.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/5.29.13-Another-Federal-Government-Cover-Up.pdf


Made links hot.
 



Thanks.
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 4:42:37 AM EDT
[#47]
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 4:44:42 AM EDT
[#48]
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 4:48:19 AM EDT
[#49]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


And this type of militarization for a cattle round up, over unpaid taxes/fees is what justifies this? The feds escalated this first. Again right or wrong on Bundy, the Shock and Awe tactics of our government is what is out of hand. If LEO and those in a similar position don't start thinking of the image they present instead of acting all military and tactical, then it just shows what gun confiscation will look like.


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

I think they came in totally unprepared. If I was planning it the area I take control of would be three time or more greater. Establish road blocks farther out. IMO a lot this spun out of their control because they did not do enough planning and did not have enough control from the start.

I could be wrong.


You need to look at the size of the area. There are dirt roads. Every wash is also used as a road. There are plenty of ways in, even from the Arizona side. They would have needed hundreds of people to try and secure every road.


I go with lesson learned. Contract security with QRF's. It could be done.


And this type of militarization for a cattle round up, over unpaid taxes/fees is what justifies this? The feds escalated this first. Again right or wrong on Bundy, the Shock and Awe tactics of our government is what is out of hand. If LEO and those in a similar position don't start thinking of the image they present instead of acting all military and tactical, then it just shows what gun confiscation will look like.




Bundy escalated this first, not the feds.  BLM tried to round up the cattle two years ago and were met threats of violence from Bundy.  So when they came to do it this year, they brought protection in case Bundy followed through.
Link Posted: 4/19/2014 4:54:30 AM EDT
[#50]
Page / 184
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top