Bundy should've taken his cows off the land.
lol that is the worst attempt at justifying a case of simple theft ever
You're pathetic.
Not a fan of civil rights huh? Least you're honest about it.
Property rights are civil rights BTW. Says so right here.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cons ution/amendmentxiv
AMENDMENT XIV
SECTION 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
This isn't a civil rights issue.
He already had his due process several times over.
You are being dishonest and disingenuous.
property rights are civil rights. 14th amendment says so.
Show me the court order allowing the BLM to kill the cows.
Rosa Parks was breaking the law. She didn't even have the Civil Rights act on her side at the time. So she was double breaking it.
The BLM can do as it pleases with abandoned cattle on its land.
Bundy can sue for compensation if he wants; he can take it out of the money he owes the US taxpayers. lol due process
Good for her. She wasn't trying to steal from the taxpayers.Rosa Parks was breaking the law. She didn't even have the Civil Rights act on her side at the time. So she was double breaking it.
Why are you trying to lionize some old kook freeloading off your tax dollars?
And since the main concern was Bundy mooching off taxpayers, not getting them off the land by any means necessary, the obvious choice was to kill them.
So to be straight, you're position is lol when the government breaks the law?
No, she just wanted to steal their seats.
Why are you so upset at someone taking a principled stand against what they think is an unjust law.
BTW its been confirmed they were limiting the number of cattle on his land, and that played into his decision to stop paying. So they were literally trying to regulate him out of business. Your position is he should have just packed up and moved. Just like Rosa Parks should have packed up and gone to the back of the bus.
BTW I get just as upset whenever I see cops violating people's civil rights in policecam videos--even if they broke the law first.
One of many options. Bundy should have taken them of BLM land.
Bundy can sue. If he wants to settle his debt to the taxpayers I'm all for compensating him for the cattle.So to be straight, you're position is lol when the government breaks the law?
Yeah, your comparison is an abject failure. There is no theft involved in the Parks situation.No, she just wanted to steal their seats.
It's not a principled stand. He just wants something for nothing.Why are you so upset at someone taking a principled stand against what they think is an unjust law.
Nah, my position is he should have paid his fees. Rosa Parks paid her bus fare.BTW its been confirmed they were limiting the number of cattle on his land, and that played into his decision to stop paying. So they were literally trying to regulate him out of business. Your position is he should have just packed up and moved. Just like Rosa Parks should have packed up and gone to the back of the bus.
ok then.
Rosa Parks was denied Liberty.
Bundy was denied Property
Sorry. This was a very intentional principled stand done to prove a point. All you have to do is listen to the man's own words and see his actions. He tried to pay the fee to the state but they wouldn't take them. If anything this is more like a tax protest. Stupid? Possibly. But there are degrees of stupidity. It's working out for him so far. But its definitely principled.
She wasn't arrested for not paying her bus fair.
Nah, there is no principle here -- unless mooching is a principle. I suppose it is to you.
Bundy owes the taxpayers of the US, so he needs to pay the federal government.
Until he does, he is simply more of a moocher than your run of the mill welfare rancher.
And I've shown the US doesn't care about being repaid, otherwise they wouldn't have killed his cattle. The IRS isn't in the business of burning down homes they foreclose on, but that's because the IRS cares about getting paid.
Until their actions show otherwise, I'm convinced this is about more than simple tax dodging.
The BLM admitted to euthanizing 2 bulls...
A BLM spokesman confirmed Thursday that two bulls had been killed during the agency’s weeklong roundup, which ended Saturday with an armed standoff between supporters of rancher Cliven Bundy and federal agents.
The two bulls posed “a safety hazard,” said BLM spokesman Craig Leff, who didn’t elaborate on the cir stances.
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/bu...cattle-roundup
You're right. The bundy's probably killed all those cows themselves and buried them just so they could blame the BLM while the BLM was on the ranch with snipers watching them do it.
They probably destroyed all those wells and all the other infrastructure to. A true Pyrrhic victory.
I actually do think the Bundys are pretty kookoo and certainly wouldn't put it past them. But I really have no evidence whatsoever either party did that.
Let's just say that when you say "The BLM has admitted that they did it", you're referring to two bulls...
how about they admitted to killing cattle? Ok, you got me, they didn't admit to killing every cow.
I couldn't find anything. Did you?
http://www.8newsnow.com/story/253105...-bundy-roundup
I found at least six
they say some "died".
Pretty bad ranchers tbh...
Don't see a quote from the BLM there...
where it says "according to the BLM"
Actually, I take that back... here's another one:
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/bu...e-died-roundup
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
