User Panel
Didn't millions of buffalo use to roam that area? Seems the turtle fared pretty well when those pesky buffalo were all over the damn place.
|
|
Quoted:
The pipe dream of selling off all federal lands couldn't possibly backfire by radically changing the nature of most of the freedom-loving states left. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
- well good luck on your crusade to get the federal government to turn those lands over. I'm sure all 3 branches of government will be exuberant to overturn all those years of precedent before it. The pipe dream of selling off all federal lands couldn't possibly backfire by radically changing the nature of most of the freedom-loving states left. Freedom loving states are owned by the states. |
|
Quoted: That's not what the article says. undy considers much of that area his ranch to use as he sees fit, but the BLM canceled his federal grazing permit 20 years ago, after the rancher refused to agree to new land-use rules and stopped paying his fees. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: He stopped paying because they informed him he won't be able to graze there because of the tortoise. Basically a fuck you to the federal government. The only issue is the stupid ass desert tortoise. undy considers much of that area his ranch to use as he sees fit, but the BLM canceled his federal grazing permit 20 years ago, after the rancher refused to agree to new land-use rules and stopped paying his fees. Maybe the new land use agreement was some kind of restriction or something about the turtles, who knows, but .gov did not cancel the contract, he stopped paying Sounds like there might be a question in the rancher's mind as to whether or not there was ever an equitable servitude established before the government took possession of the land and if there was ever notice served on the government or a suit brought within the allowed time frame. I don't think he would stand 'a snowflake's chance in Hell' of proving it, but I do know people who lived in the west before the government claimed title to all the land. They were issued patents based on their use and possession. Mining claims are another area where there are issues with the government claiming to own all the land even though people had 'staked' their claims before the government took possession. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/rancher-s-son-describes-arrest-protest-federal-cattle-roundup Rancher’s son describes arrest in protest of federal cattle roundup BLM should not even have guns/arresting powers/swat teams. BUREAU OF LAND MISMANAGEMENT. |
|
In 1848, the United States, following the Mexican-American war, purchased the land of what is now the southwestern part of the country from Mexico and paid $15 million. Present day Nevada and California were a part of that purchase along with Utah, most of Arizona, and the western portions of Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico . By 1846 the United States had claimed the Oregon Territory -- modern day Washington, Oregon, and most of Idaho. President Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase included lands in today's Idaho , Montana, Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado. The Gadsen Purchase for $10 million in 1853 added Federal lands in what is today southern Arizona. And the lands of the state of Alaska were purchased in 1867 by the United States from Russia. These purchases and claims by the people of the United States of western lands established federal ownership of those lands. Later as western states were admitted to the Union, State Constitutions acknowledged the federal role in acquiring the lands with the right and title to unappropriated public lands remaining with the United States. (Lands which had already been appropriated by private citizens or earlier granted from Mexico remained appropriated. Thus, the continuity of land owership for settlers remained intact.) Congress, then, has power over the public domain land and many laws passed by the Congress govern federal agencies responsible for management of the public land. Lots of people owned property before the fed took over. South Texas title can predate both the federal government, the Railroads and the Republic/State of Texas. The Railroads were granted tens of thousands of square-mile sections across the west. Most states also set aside scattered square-mile sections of 'school lands'. |
|
Quoted:
<snip> "Environmentalists say it’s time for Bundy to get his cattle off federal land because they are endangering the habitat of creatures who have been there forever." http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-nevada-range-war-blm-20140327,0,5253273.story#ixzz2yE5xptit View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
So, homeboy is upset because he cant let his cattle graze on land he doesn't own?? What am I missing? <snip> "Environmentalists say it’s time for Bundy to get his cattle off federal land because they are endangering the habitat of creatures who have been there forever." http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-nevada-range-war-blm-20140327,0,5253273.story#ixzz2yE5xptit "Forever"? Really? So these creatures were there from the minute the earth cooled? I'm thinking not. |
|
So this is how it starts?
Any more I don't care how it starts lets just get this FO thing going....I ain't getting any younger. |
|
Quoted:
In 1848, the United States, following the Mexican-American war, purchased the land of what is now the southwestern part of the country from Mexico and paid $15 million. Present day Nevada and California were a part of that purchase along with Utah, most of Arizona, and the western portions of Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico . By 1846 the United States had claimed the Oregon Territory -- modern day Washington, Oregon, and most of Idaho. President Jefferson's Louisiana Purchase included lands in today's Idaho , Montana, Utah, Wyoming, and Colorado. The Gadsen Purchase for $10 million in 1853 added Federal lands in what is today southern Arizona. And the lands of the state of Alaska were purchased in 1867 by the United States from Russia. These purchases and claims by the people of the United States of western lands established federal ownership of those lands. Later as western states were admitted to the Union, State Constitutions acknowledged the federal role in acquiring the lands with the right and title to unappropriated public lands remaining with the United States. (Lands which had already been appropriated by private citizens or earlier granted from Mexico remained appropriated. Thus, the continuity of land owership for settlers remained intact.) Congress, then, has power over the public domain land and many laws passed by the Congress govern federal agencies responsible for management of the public land. Lots of people owned property before the fed took over. South Texas title can predate both the federal government, the Railroads and the Republic/State of Texas. The Railroads were granted tens of thousands of square-mile sections across the west. Most states also set aside scattered square-mile sections of 'school lands'. View Quote For those who say the federal government owns ANYTHING... take pause and consider where that money comes from. Public lands belong to the public, not the government. The government MANAGES it, hence the name BLM "Basic Land Managerment." For the government to say it's "theirs" is beyond ridiculous. Note: PCSutton - this quote is not directed at you, rather using the premise of your post to direct context to those who say "the government owns the west." |
|
Quoted:
So this is how it starts? Any more I don't care how it starts lets just get this FO thing going....I ain't getting any younger. View Quote He did say in another article he has guns and will defend his cattle. Not sure if he has any pmags to pop. Ruby ridge/waco 2.0 Dogs will be shot people will be shot and burned. |
|
Quoted: 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. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes 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. Nicely stated. |
|
I am a landlord.
Don't pay your rent? I am going to evict you. Tear up my property? I am going to evict you. If you don't leave when evicted? I am paying the Sheriff to set you out. He didn't pay rent He didn't follow the landowners rules. Well Bye.jpg |
|
"Federal snipers with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) trained guns on members of a family yesterday after they dared to stop and take video footage of cattle outside the bounds of a designated “First Amendment Area,” before arresting one of the men for non-compliance."
Da fuq is that? I guess outside the fence is where we exercise our second amendment. article |
|
FSA that is what this asshole is. Nothing but FSA.
Lots of people here are applauding his Gimme My Free Shit attitude. BLM is the landlord. BLM makes the rules. BLM keeps the land from being overgrazed. They also try to find a balance between his grazing and wildlife habitat. "My grand pappy hunted and fished your land before y'all bought it, why can't we still hunt and fish?" I hear this shit all the time. If you want bucolic country views and grazing you need to buy the land. His granddad could have bought it. He also could have abided by the land use terms set by BLM. Fuck all FSA. |
|
Quoted:
So I can just go on any government land and pick any apples, blueberries I find and sell them, cut down lumber for resale. Can I borrow US Marshall's cars on the weekend if I am not going far and fill up the tank? FSA in a cowboy hat View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This is all about the envirotards and the desert tortise. Otherwise he would still be able to graze his animals there and the gov would get paid for it. the arrest of the son is kind of odd, why not specify what charges are filed? Seems odd and vague Yes, because if he didn't pay, the rain would stop falling, the grass would stop growing, and the cow poop would never decompose. Taxpayers must subsidize nature to make it work, duh. So I can just go on any government land and pick any apples, blueberries I find and sell them, cut down lumber for resale. Can I borrow US Marshall's cars on the weekend if I am not going far and fill up the tank? FSA in a cowboy hat You can pick wild blue berries and sell em, why not? they just fall on the ground and rot or the birds eat them. not many wild apple trees worth the trouble. Cutting lumber is alittle different because it takes 100 years to grow a good tree. running cattle on desert land packs the dirt and adds manure. Those two things will eventually turn desert back in to prairie if it is done right. The dust bowl was caused when farmers plowed the prairie for about 60 years. The reason it happened was the lack of bison to pack the dirt and add manure, the lack of grass roots and the losening of the soil allowed the top soil to blow a way. Whole lot of man made desert today that didnt exist 150 years ago. Hell most of the desert today in the US didnt exist 2500 years ago. |
|
Quoted:
Should I say "nothing will change your support of freeloaders"? Come on, he paid for years, he knew he was supposed to be paying, this isn't 1920 and he's some guy that used to use that land for free for years. I would guess .gov kept kicking the can down the road because they knew he was going to try to start a shitstorm and no one wanted to be the guy in charge when they had to call the district office or whatever and tell them that they now need a SWAT team to send after this guy. I know guys in NY who have poached for decades, claiming "this used to be grandpa's land" View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
I thought we were talking about grazing. I see you're deflecting, but nothing I will say will change your religion of government worship anyways. Maybe you should ask yourself why the govt. has taken 20 years to decide to do something. I bet it's because they care so damn much about that poor desert tortise. I know guys in NY who have poached for decades, claiming "this used to be grandpa's land" Where does adverse possession of this land come into play? |
|
|
|||
|
Quoted:
View Quote FBHO and FBLM |
|||
|
Damn, the desert tortoise is protected? I ran over over one in a Humvee back in '99. It wasn't on purpose, I even brake for squirrels if there's no one behind me, but I didn't feel particularly bad about it. My buddies thought it was hilarious. |
|
Quoted:
I would like to see more of nv lands freed up for public use and cattle grazing actually has a very positive environmental impact on desert areas creating micro climates that help reverse desertification. The areas that actually have some grass and forage quickly revert to rather barren dry desert if grazing is discontinued. I shared the article with a coworker living in northern NV who raises cattle and this was her response. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
I would like to see more of nv lands freed up for public use and cattle grazing actually has a very positive environmental impact on desert areas creating micro climates that help reverse desertification. The areas that actually have some grass and forage quickly revert to rather barren dry desert if grazing is discontinued. I shared the article with a coworker living in northern NV who raises cattle and this was her response. I feel sorry for him that it's all over tortoises, and feds taking his cattle, but he should also pay his bills for using the public lands. Everyone else has to. All this. My understanding is that when more grazing was allowed the desert tortoise was flourishing. Something about having readily available food sources conveniently packaged with moisture for the little reptiles. Cow pies, its what's for dinner for the slow moving tortoises. Think instant buffet. But then again it doesn't seem as though there is much push to help the tortoises recover in terms of population. It is illegal to have them reproduce in captivity - also illegal to release such offspring into the desert. |
|
This is a repost from MadMardigan(thanks!), just enlarged the font so it's easier to read.
from facebook "Sorry this is long but applicable here. By SHIREE BUNDY COX: I have had people ask me to explain my dad's stance on this BLM fight. Here it is in as simple of terms as I can explain it. There is so much to it, but here it s in a nut shell. My great grandpa bought the rights to the Bunkerville allotment back in 1887 around there.Then he sold them to my grandpa who then turned them over to my dad in 1972. These men bought and paid for their rights to the range and also built waters, fences and roads to assure the servival of their cattle, all with their own money, not with tax dollars. These rights to the land use is called preemptive rights. Some where down the line, to keep the cows from over grazing, came the bureau of land management. They were supposed to assist the ranchers in the management of their ranges while the ranchers paid a yearly allotment which was to be use to pay the BLM wages and to help with repaires and improvements of the ranches. My dad did pay his grazing fees for years to the BLM until they were no longer using his fees to help him and to improve. Instead they began using these money's against the ranchers. Repost to try and make it easier to read for some like me that struggle with that tiny print; They bought all the rest of the ranchers in the area out with they're own grazing fees. When they offered to buy my dad out for a penence he said no thanks and then fired them because they weren't doing their job. He quit paying the BLM but, tried giving his grazing fees to the county, which they turned down. So my dad just went on running his ranch and making his own improvements with his own equipment and his own money, not taxes. In essence the BLM was managing my dad out of business. Well when buying him out didn't work, they used the indangered species card. You've already heard about the desert tortis. Well that didn't work either, so then began the threats and the court orders, which my dad has proven to be unlawful for all these years. Now their desperate. It's come down to buying the brand inspector off and threatening the County Sheriff. Everything their doing at this point is illegal and totally against the constitution of the United States of America. Now you may be saying," how sad, but what does this have to do with me?" Well, I'll tell you. They will get rid of Cliven Bundy, the last man standing on the Bunkerville allotment and then they will close all the roads so no one can ever go on it again. Next, it's Utah's turn. Mark my words, Utah is next. Then there's the issue of the cattle that are at this moment being stolen. See even if dad hasn't paid them, those cattle do belong to him. Regardless where they are they are my fathers property. His herd has been part of that range for over a hundred years, long before the BLM even exsisted. Now the Feds think they can just come in and remove them and sell them without a legal brand inspection or without my dad's signature on it. They think they can take them over two boarders, which is illegal, ask any trucker. Then they plan to take them to the Richfeild Aucion and sell them. All with our tax money. They have paid off the contract cowboys and the auction owner as well as the Nevada brand inspector with our tax dollars. See how slick they are? Well, this is it in a nut shell. Thanks |
|
Quoted:
All this. My understanding is that when more grazing was allowed the desert tortoise was flourishing. Something about having readily available food sources conveniently packaged with moisture for the little reptiles. Cow pies, its what's for dinner for the slow moving tortoises. Think instant buffet. But then again it doesn't seem as though there is much push to help the tortoises recover in terms of population. It is illegal to have them reproduce in captivity - also illegal to release such offspring into the desert. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
I would like to see more of nv lands freed up for public use and cattle grazing actually has a very positive environmental impact on desert areas creating micro climates that help reverse desertification. The areas that actually have some grass and forage quickly revert to rather barren dry desert if grazing is discontinued. I shared the article with a coworker living in northern NV who raises cattle and this was her response. I feel sorry for him that it's all over tortoises, and feds taking his cattle, but he should also pay his bills for using the public lands. Everyone else has to. All this. My understanding is that when more grazing was allowed the desert tortoise was flourishing. Something about having readily available food sources conveniently packaged with moisture for the little reptiles. Cow pies, its what's for dinner for the slow moving tortoises. Think instant buffet. But then again it doesn't seem as though there is much push to help the tortoises recover in terms of population. It is illegal to have them reproduce in captivity - also illegal to release such offspring into the desert. It's illegal to let tortoises screw fed herp reaches farther than I though |
|
|
Quoted: This is a repost from MadMardigan(thanks!), just enlarged the font so it's easier to read. from facebook "Sorry this is long but applicable here. By SHIREE BUNDY COX: I have had people ask me to explain my dad's stance on this BLM fight. Here it is in as simple of terms as I can explain it. There is so much to it, but here it s in a nut shell. My great grandpa bought the rights to the Bunkerville allotment back in 1887 around there.Then he sold them to my grandpa who then turned them over to my dad in 1972. These men bought and paid for their rights to the range and also built waters, fences and roads to assure the servival of their cattle, all with their own money, not with tax dollars. These rights to the land use is called preemptive rights. Some where down the line, to keep the cows from over grazing, came the bureau of land management. They were supposed to assist the ranchers in the management of their ranges while the ranchers paid a yearly allotment which was to be use to pay the BLM wages and to help with repaires and improvements of the ranches. My dad did pay his grazing fees for years to the BLM until they were no longer using his fees to help him and to improve. Instead they began using these money's against the ranchers. Repost to try and make it easier to read for some like me that struggle with that tiny print; They bought all the rest of the ranchers in the area out with they're own grazing fees. When they offered to buy my dad out for a penence he said no thanks and then fired them because they weren't doing their job. He quit paying the BLM but, tried giving his grazing fees to the county, which they turned down. So my dad just went on running his ranch and making his own improvements with his own equipment and his own money, not taxes. In essence the BLM was managing my dad out of business. Well when buying him out didn't work, they used the indangered species card. You've already heard about the desert tortis. Well that didn't work either, so then began the threats and the court orders, which my dad has proven to be unlawful for all these years. Now their desperate. It's come down to buying the brand inspector off and threatening the County Sheriff. Everything their doing at this point is illegal and totally against the constitution of the United States of America. Now you may be saying," how sad, but what does this have to do with me?" Well, I'll tell you. They will get rid of Cliven Bundy, the last man standing on the Bunkerville allotment and then they will close all the roads so no one can ever go on it again. Next, it's Utah's turn. Mark my words, Utah is next. Then there's the issue of the cattle that are at this moment being stolen. See even if dad hasn't paid them, those cattle do belong to him. Regardless where they are they are my fathers property. His herd has been part of that range for over a hundred years, long before the BLM even exsisted. Now the Feds think they can just come in and remove them and sell them without a legal brand inspection or without my dad's signature on it. They think they can take them over two boarders, which is illegal, ask any trucker. Then they plan to take them to the Richfeild Aucion and sell them. All with our tax money. They have paid off the contract cowboys and the auction owner as well as the Nevada brand inspector with our tax dollars. See how slick they are? Well, this is it in a nut shell. Thanks View Quote |
|
Quoted:
EWG is a commie libtard outfit run by super libtard scum Ken Cook. PTUI Oh and none of the large farms around here are getting any subsidy according to that website, some smaller outfits are getting a couple of grand View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Punch in your zip code here: http://farm.ewg.org/ To see what farmers in your area have been getting for subsidies. Oh and none of the large farms around here are getting any subsidy according to that website, some smaller outfits are getting a couple of grand The top 15 in my zip each got over $1 million from 1995-2012. And couple of those are families which are represented more than once on the list. Total subsidies were $84 million for my zip during that period. Nothing but welfare for those that are already wealthy in my area. |
|
|
Quoted:
Why would I help someone who is trying to weasel out of paying his bills? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Let's go help the man. Who's with me? Why would I help someone who is trying to weasel out of paying his bills? Oh is that what he's doing? I thought this was about grazing rights. |
|
|
Quoted:
Oh is that what he's doing? I thought this was about grazing rights. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Let's go help the man. Who's with me? Why would I help someone who is trying to weasel out of paying his bills? Oh is that what he's doing? I thought this was about grazing rights. Grazing rights on land he doesn't own and stopped paying the fee to continue grazing on years ago. |
|
Quoted:
Grazing rights on land he doesn't own and stopped paying the fee to continue grazing on years ago. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Let's go help the man. Who's with me? Why would I help someone who is trying to weasel out of paying his bills? Oh is that what he's doing? I thought this was about grazing rights. Grazing rights on land he doesn't own and stopped paying the fee to continue grazing on years ago. Hard to believe its that simple. What about the Facebook post by the daughter? |
|
Anyone else see the Fox News special last night about BLM being used to go after big oil and ranchers? It's a fucking crime
|
|
|
Quoted:
Do they have swat and sniper teams? I don't care for faux news or any other cable news. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Anyone else see the Fox News special last night about BLM being used to go after big oil and ranchers? It's a fucking crime Do they have swat and sniper teams? I don't care for faux news or any other cable news. The local sherif told the Feds he would be on the ranchers side if the invaded the ranch. .Gov backed down from the raid. |
|
Quoted:
Let's go help the man. Who's with me? View Quote I'm down.......got plenty of ammo and no job either. What if 10,000 armed citizens open carried to that area? If this was Nye county, NV that sheriff would arrest the BLM people. He already was gonna in another incident. Bunkerville is in Clark county and Sheriff Douglas C. Gillespie is a pussy. |
|
Quoted:
The local sherif told the Feds he would be on the ranchers side if the invaded the ranch. .Gov backed down from the raid. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Anyone else see the Fox News special last night about BLM being used to go after big oil and ranchers? It's a fucking crime Do they have swat and sniper teams? I don't care for faux news or any other cable news. The local sherif told the Feds he would be on the ranchers side if the invaded the ranch. .Gov backed down from the raid. What state? Got a link? |
|
Quoted:
I'm down.......got plenty of ammo and no job either. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Let's go help the man. Who's with me? I'm down.......got plenty of ammo and no job either. Yeah I got to go to work in a couple hours. But damn I would like to it would be better than sitting around getting old and waiting for a heart attack |
|
Quoted:
The local sherif told the Feds he would be on the ranchers side if the invaded the ranch. .Gov backed down from the raid. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Anyone else see the Fox News special last night about BLM being used to go after big oil and ranchers? It's a fucking crime Do they have swat and sniper teams? I don't care for faux news or any other cable news. The local sherif told the Feds he would be on the ranchers side if the invaded the ranch. .Gov backed down from the raid. klamath falls or some such right ? |
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Anyone else see the Fox News special last night about BLM being used to go after big oil and ranchers? It's a fucking crime Do they have swat and sniper teams? I don't care for faux news or any other cable news. The local sherif told the Feds he would be on the ranchers side if the invaded the ranch. .Gov backed down from the raid. What state? Got a link? I think it was Arizona or Nevada it might be the same story. I can't find a link The ranch owner actually went to law school because his lawyer bill were so high. A judge ruled in his favor awarded him 14 million dollars in attorney's fees and compensation and the .gov refused to pay. The .gov is still on his ass In the segment they also talked about the guy who discovered Fracking for oil and how he is under assault because they found a dead bird in his mud pit. Crazy shit. |
|
At first, I felt Cliven was in the wrong and generally being a jackass.
The more I learn about that real details of what is going on, the more I realize that what the Fed's are doing - and most certainly how they are doing it - is a steaming pile of buffalo shit! |
|
Quoted:
View Quote I believe it. Same thing happened to my families water right when dealing with the National Forrest Service. One day a Ranger retires, and is replaced by a new JBT hotshot. The next day they refuse to acknowledge a written water right exercised for over 20 years. Time to tear out the pipes they say. 25 years of legal battle later, it turns out a Judge says Mr JBT fishcop was wrong, and the taxpayer has to foot the bill for all the lawyers. That is what "winning" against the Fed was like for my family. If these guys don't want to end up broke, in jail and or dead, they'd better get a good lawyer and have some documentation of the original rights. If they don't have those resources, then the choice is to surrender all or part of your way of life, and maybe go work at Walmart, or die trying to fight the man to the last. |
|||
|
|
Quoted: 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. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes 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. |
|
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. I know, right? Classic Rick, though. Where do new states come from, if not Federal land? Article 4, Section 3 "New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress. The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States" Seems to be a power strongly implied there.... |
|
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. He's right |
|
Quoted:
I know, right? Classic Rick, though. Where do new states come from, if not Federal land? Article 4, Section 3 "New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress. The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States" Seems to be a power strongly implied there.... View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes 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. I know, right? Classic Rick, though. Where do new states come from, if not Federal land? Article 4, Section 3 "New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress. The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States" Seems to be a power strongly implied there.... WTF does the highlighted even mean? Looks like lawyer language that can be interpreted to mean just about anything. |
|
Quoted:
WTF does the highlighted even mean? Looks like lawyer language that can be interpreted to mean just about anything. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes 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. I know, right? Classic Rick, though. Where do new states come from, if not Federal land? Article 4, Section 3 "New states may be admitted by the Congress into this union; but no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state; nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress. The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States" Seems to be a power strongly implied there.... WTF does the highlighted even mean? Looks like lawyer language that can be interpreted to mean just about anything. It means that Congress runs territory that belongs to the US. |
|
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.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.