Oregon Occupiers

Anything that wont fit in any of the other forums

Moderators: greenyellow, UOducksTK1

User avatar
Bud Lee
All Pac-12
Posts: 5540
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 7:03 am
Location: Da Boot

Oregon Occupiers

Post by Bud Lee »

Can anyone help a Louisiana guy understand what in the hell is going on over there?
User avatar
Phalanx
Senior
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by Phalanx »

They obviously are getting publicity, or Bud wouldn't have heard about it.

It seems like the Hammonds have a strong case - even the congressman of that district who wrote the applicable law is getting involved. The militia folks are like many other activist groups - they posture to get attention. I sympathize with some of their issues, but a lot of them, like the Bundy family, are just trying to keep their low-cost access to government land going. It essentially amounts to welfare.

The government controls too much land in the western states, and like a lot of other government agencies, the BLM is out of control and their lack of proper accountability has led to the kind of tyrannical operation that we see with the Hammond family, who have been labeled 'terrorists' for doing their own brush fire work out in the middle of nowhere. The BLM is trying to gobble up their ranch like they have so many others in the West.
User avatar
UOducksTK1
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 37590
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
GM: Boston Celtics GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by UOducksTK1 »

Phalanx wrote:They obviously are getting publicity, or Bud wouldn't have heard about it.

It seems like the Hammonds have a strong case - even the congressman of that district who wrote the applicable law is getting involved. The militia folks are like many other activist groups - they posture to get attention. I sympathize with some of their issues, but a lot of them, like the Bundy family, are just trying to keep their low-cost access to government land going. It essentially amounts to welfare.

The government controls too much land in the western states, and like a lot of other government agencies, the BLM is out of control and their lack of proper accountability has led to the kind of tyrannical operation that we see with the Hammond family, who have been labeled 'terrorists' for doing their own brush fire work out in the middle of nowhere. The BLM is trying to gobble up their ranch like they have so many others in the West.
Yup, well said. Bureau of Land Management + Fish and Wildlife Service = control freaks and bullies. They've basically forced all the farmers out by jacking up fees on grazing and by revoking permits, and then inherited all the land and infrastructure such as irrigation. The lack of accountability for their actions baffles me.

Do Not Fear. Isaiah 41:13
User avatar
Tray Dub
All Pac-12
Posts: 5004
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:31 pm

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by Tray Dub »

Phalanx wrote:They obviously are getting publicity, or Bud wouldn't have heard about it.

It seems like the Hammonds have a strong case - even the congressman of that district who wrote the applicable law is getting involved. The militia folks are like many other activist groups - they posture to get attention. I sympathize with some of their issues, but a lot of them, like the Bundy family, are just trying to keep their low-cost access to government land going. It essentially amounts to welfare.

The government controls too much land in the western states, and like a lot of other government agencies, the BLM is out of control and their lack of proper accountability has led to the kind of tyrannical operation that we see with the Hammond family, who have been labeled 'terrorists' for doing their own brush fire work out in the middle of nowhere. The BLM is trying to gobble up their ranch like they have so many others in the West.
Seems to me their case is very weak and they deserved their prison time. From the Bend Bulletin:
In the case, filed in 2010, federal prosecutors accused the Hammonds of lighting seven fires on federally managed land between 1982 and 2006, the largest of which burned 46,000 acres, according to court records. The government accused the Hammonds of using matches to spark the fires near their ranch.

During the trial, hunters testified that a 2001 fire may have been set to scare them out of a hunting area and destroy evidence of poaching by the Hammonds, according to court records. Another witness — who is Dwight Hammonds’ grandson and Steven Hammonds’ nephew and who was 13 years old in 2001 — testified that he was ordered to ignite fires with matches. He nearly became trapped by 8-to-10-foot flames.

Bureau of Land Management firefighters testified that while fighting lightning-caused blazes in 2006, they had to move to a safer location after Steven Hammond lit fires nearby.

Hammond started the fires to save winter feed for his cattle but did so during a burn ban, at night and without warning anyone about the fires, the acting U.S. Attorney wrote in his statement.

“When confronted by a firefighter the next day, Steven Hammond admitted setting the fires, and made no apology for doing so,” Williams wrote.
They set fires illegally and dangerously. A judge took pity on them and sentenced them to less than the law required, another judge came in and enforced the law and put them back in jail for the amount of time the law requires. That all seems like they got exactly what they deserved.
Duck24
Senior
Posts: 4747
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:36 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by Duck24 »

Except for the part where they torched federal land to cover up poaching a bunch of deer. I think they got the shaft from the appeals court that ordered them back to jail after serving their initial sentence but they aren't exactly innocent people who have been wrongly accused/convicted.

As for the Bundy clown and his pack of halfwits, I would love nothing more than for a thousand pound JDAM to take them out. They need to be removed from the gene pool immediately.
User avatar
Phalanx
Senior
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by Phalanx »

Biggus Duckus wrote:Republicans are all for mandatory minimum sentencing unless it happens to them. The Hammonds sound like terrible people so I his I don't have any sympathy for them. It also bothers me to see a bunch of fatasses trying to be all cool with their paramilitary gear. Go join the Army or do something constructive rather than try to play soldier.
I don't really see this as a 'Republican/ Democrat' issue, it has more to do with civil liberties and property rights. I don't know what info you have on the Hammonds being terrible people either, and I'm not sure it matters. The BLM has a long history of trying to acquire people's ranches, first by offering money, and then by more forceful means. It is being reported that in this case, the Hammonds refused to sell, and so now they are being carted off to jail for 5 years and with huge fines as well, and they aren't allowed to sell to anyone but the government. If true, this is tyranny plain and simple. As I say, even Congressman Walden was hinting that he would like to see an outcome where they don't have to sell to the BLM.

Here is his speech on the House floor, in case anyone missed it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx4ocLdWE90
User avatar
Phalanx
Senior
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by Phalanx »

Duck24 wrote:Except for the part where they torched federal land to cover up poaching a bunch of deer. I think they got the shaft from the appeals court that ordered them back to jail after serving their initial sentence but they aren't exactly innocent people who have been wrongly accused/convicted.

As for the Bundy clown and his pack of halfwits, I would love nothing more than for a thousand pound JDAM to take them out. They need to be removed from the gene pool immediately.
This is why I hate politics. People making snap judgements and following up with incredibly stupid commentary that shows how little they value humanity in general, and particularly those they believe are of a different political mindset. Your post disgusts me.

It appears that the star witness in the case was a child of questionable mental faculties. In any case, even the guy who wrote the law is saying that the application to this case is outrageous. I think people need to look into this a little more.
User avatar
UOducksTK1
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 37590
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
GM: Boston Celtics GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by UOducksTK1 »

Tray Dub wrote:
In the case, filed in 2010, federal prosecutors accused the Hammonds of lighting seven fires on federally managed land between 1982 and 2006, the largest of which burned 46,000 acres, according to court records. The government accused the Hammonds of using matches to spark the fires near their ranch.

During the trial, hunters testified that a 2001 fire may have been set to scare them out of a hunting area and destroy evidence of poaching by the Hammonds, according to court records. Another witness — who is Dwight Hammonds’ grandson and Steven Hammonds’ nephew and who was 13 years old in 2001 — testified that he was ordered to ignite fires with matches. He nearly became trapped by 8-to-10-foot flames.

Bureau of Land Management firefighters testified that while fighting lightning-caused blazes in 2006, they had to move to a safer location after Steven Hammond lit fires nearby.

Hammond started the fires to save winter feed for his cattle but did so during a burn ban, at night and without warning anyone about the fires, the acting U.S. Attorney wrote in his statement.

“When confronted by a firefighter the next day, Steven Hammond admitted setting the fires, and made no apology for doing so,” Williams wrote.
They set fires illegally and dangerously. A judge took pity on them and sentenced them to less than the law required, another judge came in and enforced the law and put them back in jail for the amount of time the law requires. That all seems like they got exactly what they deserved.
There is no law against them burning their own land. Both times before they set fires, they informed the fire department. In 2001, they did accidentally burn 139 acres of public property. And in 2006, they did burn one acre of public property. http://www.bendbulletin.com/localstate/ ... y-ranchers#

So fine them for the 140 acres of damages and move on.

Do Not Fear. Isaiah 41:13
User avatar
UOducksTK1
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 37590
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
GM: Boston Celtics GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by UOducksTK1 »

Phalanx wrote:
Duck24 wrote:Except for the part where they torched federal land to cover up poaching a bunch of deer. I think they got the shaft from the appeals court that ordered them back to jail after serving their initial sentence but they aren't exactly innocent people who have been wrongly accused/convicted.

As for the Bundy clown and his pack of halfwits, I would love nothing more than for a thousand pound JDAM to take them out. They need to be removed from the gene pool immediately.
This is why I hate politics. People making snap judgements and following up with incredibly stupid commentary that shows how little they value humanity in general, and particularly those they believe are of a different political mindset. Your post disgusts me.

It appears that the star witness in the case was a child of questionable mental faculties. In any case, even the guy who wrote the law is saying that the application to this case is outrageous. I think people need to look into this a little more.
Exactly. It shouldn't be about politics, but that's the only way people know how to take conversations. It's not even about these specific people. It's about our rights in general. This has been a growing theme for the last couple decades. The government is jacking up prices on grazing and water rights. In fact, there's been a lot of reported cases where these the BLM has illegally put barriers in the way of local farmers. A simple google and a little research is all it takes. Here's a few articles off the top of a quick google search:
http://www.redstate.com/2015/10/21/gove ... eize-land/
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-s ... enerations

Fundamental rights are being stripped. If we don't live the way the government wants us to or according to their prices and standards, than we can't live basically.

Do Not Fear. Isaiah 41:13
User avatar
Tray Dub
All Pac-12
Posts: 5004
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:31 pm

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by Tray Dub »

UOducksTK1 wrote:
Tray Dub wrote:
In the case, filed in 2010, federal prosecutors accused the Hammonds of lighting seven fires on federally managed land between 1982 and 2006, the largest of which burned 46,000 acres, according to court records. The government accused the Hammonds of using matches to spark the fires near their ranch.

During the trial, hunters testified that a 2001 fire may have been set to scare them out of a hunting area and destroy evidence of poaching by the Hammonds, according to court records. Another witness — who is Dwight Hammonds’ grandson and Steven Hammonds’ nephew and who was 13 years old in 2001 — testified that he was ordered to ignite fires with matches. He nearly became trapped by 8-to-10-foot flames.

Bureau of Land Management firefighters testified that while fighting lightning-caused blazes in 2006, they had to move to a safer location after Steven Hammond lit fires nearby.

Hammond started the fires to save winter feed for his cattle but did so during a burn ban, at night and without warning anyone about the fires, the acting U.S. Attorney wrote in his statement.

“When confronted by a firefighter the next day, Steven Hammond admitted setting the fires, and made no apology for doing so,” Williams wrote.
They set fires illegally and dangerously. A judge took pity on them and sentenced them to less than the law required, another judge came in and enforced the law and put them back in jail for the amount of time the law requires. That all seems like they got exactly what they deserved.
There is no law against them burning their own land. Both times before they set fires, they informed the fire department. In 2001, they did accidentally burn 139 acres of public property. And in 2006, they did burn one acre of public property. http://www.bendbulletin.com/localstate/ ... y-ranchers#

So fine them for the 140 acres of damages and move on.
I'm curious, then, why the prosecutors talk about repeated fires, including one that burned 46,000 acres. I genuinely don't know the details of the case and would appreciate an explanation (especially one with links to neutral sources).
Duck24
Senior
Posts: 4747
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:36 am
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by Duck24 »

Do you know how much land 140 acres is? Put in football terms, burning 140 acres is the equivalent of burning every football field (end zones included) in the NFL three times and then 10 more. Accidental or not, that is a crime. Read up on how close these fires were to killing firefighters fighting other wildfires in the area as well as others.

I do have an issue with them serving a sentence for the same crime twice but my issue is more with the judge who decided to ignore the mandatory sentencing laws. If these nitwits are so upset that this land was taken from someone, why not give it back to its rightful owners, the Native Americans? As far as the JDAM comment, that was a joke. I'd much prefer the government officials wait them out and let them leave with their tail between their legs. Don't give them or their supporters the satisfaction of attention.

It does beg the question though, if these were black or middle eastern people who were doing this, how long would this have played out before the building was raided gun blazing? 6 hours? The first nightfall?
User avatar
UOducksTK1
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 37590
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
GM: Boston Celtics GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by UOducksTK1 »

Duck24 wrote:Do you know how much land 140 acres is? Put in football terms, burning 140 acres is the equivalent of burning every football field (end zones included) in the NFL three times and then 10 more. Accidental or not, that is a crime. Read up on how close these fires were to killing firefighters fighting other wildfires in the area as well as others.

I do have an issue with them serving a sentence for the same crime twice but my issue is more with the judge who decided to ignore the mandatory sentencing laws. If these nitwits are so upset that this land was taken from someone, why not give it back to its rightful owners, the Native Americans? As far as the JDAM comment, that was a joke. I'd much prefer the government officials wait them out and let them leave with their tail between their legs. Don't give them or their supporters the satisfaction of attention.

It does beg the question though, if these were black or middle eastern people who were doing this, how long would this have played out before the building was raided gun blazing? 6 hours? The first nightfall?
I spent 22 years growing up on 10 acres, so I get it. I'm not saying it's not a crime, but if you can't see that the BLM and FDS have a personal vendetta against these farmers and farmers in general, than I think you're overlooking a lot of evidence. While it doesn't get talked about a lot, they are driving out our farmers in a very unjust manner.

How does Ethan Couch get offer with minimal penalties for killing four people while driving drunk? I think it's a double standard in this country how we let others with more heinous crimes get off way easier, and then people who have frankly been heckled by the government since day 1 are given 5 years of jail time. I'm not even advocating for these people entirely, because they probably have done some stupid things, but the basic fundamentals and principles of our country are being violated IMO.

If someone has been living in a place for generations and had their property taken because they were black or Muslim, then personally I'd be posting the same thing. But yeah maybe there are some who wouldn't, and that's a sad thing.

Do Not Fear. Isaiah 41:13
User avatar
UOducksTK1
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 37590
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
GM: Boston Celtics GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by UOducksTK1 »

Duck24 wrote:If these nitwits are so upset that this land was taken from someone, why not give it back to its rightful owners, the Native Americans??
I'm fine with that, as long as we give the Hammonds new land, free education, and special rights to compensate for forcing them unjustly out of their property.

Do Not Fear. Isaiah 41:13
User avatar
UOducksTK1
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 37590
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
GM: Boston Celtics GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by UOducksTK1 »

Biggus Duckus wrote:
UOducksTK1 wrote:
Duck24 wrote:If these nitwits are so upset that this land was taken from someone, why not give it back to its rightful owners, the Native Americans??
I'm fine with that, as long as we give the Hammonds new land, free education, and special rights to compensate for forcing them unjustly out of their property.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the ... -discount/
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ($11.24 per AUM). That's hardly cheap. Additionally, that's just one fee. I'd like to see everything else on top of that. Including FWS.

Also they try to blame him in 1993 for accessing public land without a permit, but after revoking his, you essentially have to sell your soul to apply for a new permit. Ranchers who want to renew a permit have to reduce their heard by 90%, basically forfeiting without compensation hundreds of thousands of dollars in water and grazing permits that ranchers had purchased. So even a slight, unintentional offense could cause detrimental to your land/farm.

Also the endangered Tortoise thing sounds like a way to push them off their land. This is what I read (Might not be true), but apparently BLM did a stud and discovered there were higher bird and nesting populations on the grazed land than the protected land.

Even if you are a fairly law abiding farmer, the rules are setup in a way where you can restrict their uses of permits or land with weak reasoning. You do anything that the BLM doesn't like, and they will do anything to ruin your life. Things have obviously escalated since BLM and the farmers headbutted. And I certainly don't agree with all the actions of the farmers, nor do I think they are ideal citizens. But personally, I see the BLM overstepping their boundaries more so than the farmers (not specifically in this case, but from what I've read the last 5-10 years).

Do Not Fear. Isaiah 41:13
User avatar
MFRDuckFan
Senior
Posts: 4848
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:52 pm
Location: Medford

Re: Oregon Occupiers

Post by MFRDuckFan »

Duck24 wrote:Do you know how much land 140 acres is? Put in football terms, burning 140 acres is the equivalent of burning every football field (end zones included) in the NFL three times and then 10 more. Accidental or not, that is a crime. Read up on how close these fires were to killing firefighters fighting other wildfires in the area as well as others.

I do have an issue with them serving a sentence for the same crime twice but my issue is more with the judge who decided to ignore the mandatory sentencing laws. If these nitwits are so upset that this land was taken from someone, why not give it back to its rightful owners, the Native Americans? As far as the JDAM comment, that was a joke. I'd much prefer the government officials wait them out and let them leave with their tail between their legs. Don't give them or their supporters the satisfaction of attention.

It does beg the question though, if these were black or middle eastern people who were doing this, how long would this have played out before the building was raided gun blazing? 6 hours? The first nightfall?
^^ This. There are also charges of child abuse stemming from the Hammonds having kids start the fires, but that is a topic for another day. Please remember these guys have also taken government monies (yes, look it up) so you can't rail against the government, take money from the government coffers & keep railing. Please............ These guys need to go home.

Wait until it gets serious and they shut the water off so your poop piles up. Not a pretty sight.
Post Reply