Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
acidhead

FEDS move in on rancher - Remove Cattle

420 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Sir Wearer of Hats

Does ownership count for anything? If you own a house, can a future government act take that ownership away?

Here in Oz, the answer is "yes".

Should, for example, a new train line need to go trhough my house then the government can buy it at "lowest market rate" and turf me out.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

Here in Oz, the answer is "yes".

Should, for example, a new train line need to go trhough my house then the government can buy it at "lowest market rate" and turf me out.

Who owns the train line you speak of?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jeepguy2014

Here in Oz, the answer is "yes".

Should, for example, a new train line need to go trhough my house then the government can buy it at "lowest market rate" and turf me out.

Actually they have to pay fair market value so they would most likely have to get three independant appraisals. I beleieve its called imminent domain. For the good of many over the few or something to that effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats

Who owns the train line you speak of?

three guesses ;)

We don't have private mass transport systems here in Oz (although the nasty little creatures we elected to both sate and federal government want to sell the public transport systems to make some quick cash).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_in_Australia

Except for a small number of private railways, most of the Australian railway network infrastructure is government-owned, either at the federal or state level. Most railway operatorswere once state government agencies, but with privatisation in the 1990s, private companies now operate the majority of trains in Australia.

three guesses ;)

We don't have private mass transport systems here in Oz (although the nasty little creatures we elected to both sate and federal government want to sell the public transport systems to make some quick cash).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

Most private corporations operate the trains on gov infustructure(property) in Australia. And the gov is allowed to kick you off your property at the lowest accessed property value if a new line runs through your property?

Edited by acidhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

Just curious. ..

How do you define "power and the law"?

Power being, the one capable of most force and willing to use it.

Law being what is written down as the law.

Edited by Scheming B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

The 'first amendment signs' are for "the press"? --reeeally?

Haha

That's a good one!

My mistake, refreshed what the purpose was. It's a place for people to stand who want to protest or whatever without being in the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

Power being, the one capable of most force.

Law being what is written down as the law.

"Power being, the one capable of most force"?

Do you live in the United States? The USA is a Republic is it not? What's the purpose of State GOV?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

Yes, Yes, depends who you ask.

also, I amended that to

"capable of most force and willing to use it"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

My mistake, refreshed what purpose was. It's a place for people to stand who want to protest or whatever without being in the way.

The 'first amendment signs' in question here are "place (s) for people to stand who want to protest or whatever without being in the way"?

Just curious...

Who placed the signs there? The Federal or State GOV authorities?

Is the road there Federal property or State property?

Now, does the GOV with the capibility of exerting the most use of force trumph other forms of GOV already present?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

Seems there is zero purpose of a State GOV if Federal GOV is a more capable force willing to exert their force on State individuals!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

Id imagine federal government put the signs there as this is a federal situation, if the state put it there, Good for the state for keeping things in order

The road leading to it, it depends, one would have to look up the specifics if its a state road or county road, or what have you.

Yes, as long as they are willing to exert their force, be it diplomatically, or in less subtle ways.

State is there to take care of smaller, more local situation, and to carry out the orders of the Federal government. We're a republic, not a confederation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

What's good enough for Florida is just fine with the individual living in the State of Washington!

One big happy family!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

That's why there are representatives in the fed government from those states.

congress is made of representatives from districts around the country, elected by the people of those districts to represent them and their interests. This is how a republic works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sakari

I ride quads so I guess that makes me an idiot in your eyes? You should be careful in how you stereotype people into a single class when it is an reasonable assumption that you don't know every single rider of quads and 4X4's. It makes you look silly and uniformed and well, basically, a blowhard. BTW I live in Maricopa, AZ and use BLM land often.

You brought up the word " assumption "......As someone else who read it correctly, I meant the single idiot on that quad that rammed that vehicle.

I love quads, and I love bikes.

I lived near Coos Bay, Oregon. If you ever get the chance, look up " Oregon Dunes "......Quad heaven there.

Glad you know what the BLM is really doing for the public ( you use the land also ) Without them, it could all be private, and no riding, no trespassing, no hunting, etc,etc,etc

Not familiar with Maricopa, just moved here 7 months ago.

Normally I would have jumped your ****, but I guess I am in a very good mood, and can live with the miss understanding.

Living here, I want a RZR very bad, but not for $19,000.00......Pipe dream for now.

edit :

They are a huge, and great impact on preserving the land from idiots on Quads, and 4x4's.

Oops, that sentence. I can see how you thought that. I thought you meant a reply I made about the idiot on the quad.

So, yes, I meant the idiots that tear **** up, not the responsible ones. And you know what I mean. Of course I do not think all " quad " riders are idiots. Not all people are idiots, but a majority are.

If it helps, I think people who ride motorcycles ( and I rode, in clubs, and 10 months out of the year most of my life ) without helmets are idiots. But that is another topic.

Edited by Sakari
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

State is there to take care of smaller, more local situation, and to carry out the orders of the Federal government. We're a republic, not a confederation.

Federalism in the United States:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism#United_States.

Question

Why did the Founding Fathers chose federalism instead of either a confederation or a unitary system in 1787?

Answer

Federalism is known as State's Rights.  It embodies the concept put in the Constitution by the founding fathers that each state was to be a  strong and definite political body in and of itself.  The states were to retain most authority to govern their own affairs without interference from the federal government.  While we think of our modern America as a democracy, that was not the original intent of the founders. Their concept was for the states to be a group united together under the idea of a free republic. After the Constitutional Convention, when Benjamin Franklin was asked by a citizen what they had been given, he replied, "A republic, if you can keep it".  A republic would have less of a central government with more power residing in the individual states. 

Edited by acidhead
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sundew

Seems the Feds have suddenly backed off, by shear coincidence (sarc) at the same time it was found out Harry Reid and the Chinese government wanted that land for a solar energy farm. Infowars has the story.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sakari

A couple things....

Not seeing it here yet, but the right wing, militia sites are claiming " victory "....Cracks me up. BLM stated they are leaving because they do not want any of them, or any of the public to get hurt because of this fiasco. Shows me they are the bigger person, not the losers. They also stated it is not over, and it will be handled Judicially ( all ready has ), and in Court.

"As we have said from the beginning of the gather to remove illegal cattle from federal land consistent with court orders, a safe and peaceful operation is our number one priority. After one week, we have made progress in enforcing two recent court orders to remove the trespass cattle from public lands that belong to all Americans.

Based on information about conditions on the ground, and in consultation with law enforcement, we have made a decision to conclude the cattle gather because of our serious concern about the safety of employees and members of the public.

We ask that all parties in the area remain peaceful and law-abiding as the Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service work to end the operation in an orderly manner.

Ranching has always been an important part of our nation’s heritage and continues throughout the West on public lands that belong to all Americans. This is a matter of fairness and equity, and we remain disappointed that Cliven Bundy continues to not comply with the same laws that 16,000 public lands ranchers do every year. After 20 years and multiple court orders to remove the trespass cattle, Mr. Bundy owes the American taxpayers in excess of $1 million. The BLM will continue to work to resolve the matter administratively and judicially."

Second :

What do other Ranchers think about this crap?...Crap meaning the idiot not paying his fees. ( that he used to pay until he took it on himself to " fire the BLM ", yes , his words. )

So far, the Nevada Cattlemen's Association (NCA), which represents some 700 ranchers in the state, is taking a hands-off stance on Bundy's protest.

In a statement, the association noted that Bundy's case had been reviewed by a federal judge, and that a legal decision had been rendered to remove the cattle. The statement said that NCA "does not feel it is in our best interest to interfere in the process of adjudication in this matter, and in addition NCA believes the matter is between Mr. Bundy and the federal courts."

Asked about the Bundy situation, NCA president Ron Torell told ABC News, "This has gotten way out of hand."

Asked if other Nevada cattlemen were as angry with the federal government as Bundy, Torell said, "absolutely not."

It's true, he said, that many NCA members are disgruntled at having to deal with BLM's bureaucracy. But, he noted, 87 percent of Nevada land is public land, so cattlemen cannot survive on private land alone. "It's important for our permitees to work with the land management agencies. We want to be good stewards of the land -- to protect natural resources."

Of the Bundy affair, he said, "These types of situations have a way of painting the entire industry with controversy."

Below is a reply to another reply, has nothing to do with above.....

Seems the Feds have suddenly backed off, by shear coincidence (sarc) at the same time it was found out Harry Reid and the Chinese government wanted that land for a solar energy farm. Infowars has the story.

Militia lying and propoganda......Funny stuff.

Edited by Sakari

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

*all the stuff you said*

*summariaziation

the states do have certain rights, as is doled out by the Federal Government. Federalism still puts the federal government as the most powerful entity, but is still run by the common man via elections.

Regardless of all that.

I'm not myopic enough in my country worship to think that everything the founding fathers did was correct. Our civil war decided the power belonged to the federal government. Giving too much power to the states only works in a small situation like the founding fathers were in, they didn't count for the expansion of the country. With the vastness of our country now, its necessary to have a strong central figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
acidhead

the states do have certain rights, as is doled out by the Federal Government. Federalism still puts the federal government as the most powerful entity, but is still run by the common man via elections.

Regardless of all that.

I'm not myopic enough in my country worship to think that everything the founding fathers did was correct. Our civil war decided the power belonged to the federal government. Giving too much power to the states only works in a small situation like the founding fathers were in, they didn't count for the expansion of the country. With the vastness of our country now, its necessary to have a strong central figure.

Okay... if what you just said is what you believe. .."it is necessary to have a strong central figure" (Federal GOV)

Is the Federal GOV doing a good job representing you as an individual in your State, wherever that is? (State representatives to the Federal GOV)

I ask because I believe most Federal representatives are out of touch with the State individuals they represent. They seem to represent their campaign donars more than they represent the people back home in their State. It's pretty obvious.

Edited by acidhead
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skep B

Then the people should elect someone else. If they keep those in power who they don't like they have no one to blame but themselves.

as for my personal standing, I disagree with many choices the government is making, especially those of our local representatives, but they're the ones in control, and I don't have to fight with stray cats to find food for my family.

So, I can't really complain. These representatives are just people. Whatever they chose to do, they feel is the best course of action to take, however they justify that is up to them, just like the justifications we all make every day.

The union at large is more important than any one state

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ugly1

A couple things....

Not seeing it here yet, but the right wing, militia sites are claiming " victory "....Cracks me up. BLM stated they are leaving because they do not want any of them, or any of the public to get hurt because of this fiasco. Shows me they are the bigger person, not the losers. They also stated it is not over, and it will be handled Judicially ( all ready has ), and in Court.

Second :

What do other Ranchers think about this crap?...Crap meaning the idiot not paying his fees. ( that he used to pay until he took it on himself to " fire the BLM ", yes , his words. )

Below is a reply to another reply, has nothing to do with above.....

Militia lying and propoganda......Funny stuff.

Too bad these laws being made up to steal freedoms are not taking your lively hood as of yet. When the legacy your family has built for centuries that you would be handing to your child is stolen, you can hope that people come to support you as well. This isn't about the cattle. This may have started being over the cattle but this is now about our freedoms and liberties being stolen. If you did not know that already then I will not be able to convince you so just keep on denying what is happening.

Edit: I just read some of your other comments from different topics stating how you think government is out of control. I guess I am confused on your stance regarding this subject. The fact that this is being made out to be about his cows by the media is just ridiculous to me. While I do want this man to get his cows back, I do not think militias have gone to his location in order to retrieve cattle. My intentions on going to protest was due to the fact that this seems to be a staging point for standing up for the constitution. We still have the ability to go hold signs and protest, get attention, and then demand people out of office. When the shots begin to be fired I think that we will lose that and people standing up for freedom will be left with little choice on course of action.

Edited by Ugly1
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sakari

Edit: I just read some of your other comments from different topics stating how you think government is out of control. I guess I am confused on your stance regarding this subject. The fact that this is being made out to be about his cows by the media is just ridiculous to me. While I do want this man to get his cows back, I do not think militias have gone to his location in order to retrieve cattle. My intentions on going to protest was due to the fact that this seems to be a staging point for standing up for the constitution. We still have the ability to go hold signs and protest, get attention, and then demand people out of office. When the shots begin to be fired I think that we will lose that and people standing up for freedom will be left with little choice on course of action.

You are 100% correct. I think we need a revolution. But, in this particular topic, he is wrong, and so are his " supporters ". I explained why all ready, and the other ranchers in Nevada feel the same.

Do I feel the Government is out of control?....Yes, but maybe not out of control, instead, " lost ", and miss managed.

Does this mean I jump on every " right wing " bandwagon topic there is?.....Nope, I still have common sense.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F3SS

And the Feds are giving the cattle back. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/12/us-usa-ranchers-nevada-idUSBREA3B03Q20140412 They are also not enforcing the grazing fees and the cattle are allowed graze on the same land.

Bundy's owed $1.3M. How much did this fiasco cost tax payers?

I've been up in the air over this event, not being sure who's actually right in all this. I was kind of siding with the government for while, but not how they handled this situation. If Bundy's owed so much for so long and he was truly wrong then how come they didn't simply arrest him right off the bat and why did it take 20 years to make a move? Unless this Harry Reid China deal is real? Now that they've ended the stand-off, pulled back on their demands and given the cattle back I can't help but think the Feds may have been wrong and this' been an example of how the gov will try and do and demand what they want and go to great lengths for it. They will push you around if you don't stand up.

Now, I understand the whole qualm about profiting from public resources but apparently Bundy's had a preeminent right to this territory or else the Feds had no reason to give up. Also, since the grazing law was set in 1930, and perhaps rightfully so as cattle were destroying much of the land, does that mean the law has to remain in effect for all time? This is just a guess but I'll bet there were far more cattle ranchers with far more cattle in the 1930's than there are today. Were Bundy's cattle really doing so much damage? After all, the cattle have been living fine off the land for decades so the resources must be aplenty.

Last, I wonder if an armed citizenry had anything to do with the Feds backing down? I read that there were quite a few making sure the Feds had to stare down a barrel too.

Edited by F3SS
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.