Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: timfogarty on January 02, 2016, 07:56:46 PM
-
Oh, wait, no. It's white militia, offshoot of Cliven Bundy
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/02/3735576/150-armed-militia-members-take-over-federal-building/
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/01/drama_in_burns_ends_with_quiet.html
-
Has anyone heard from AJ today? :-\
-
Good for them. Many non-Americans and even some Americans have no idea how offend our government and law enforcement shits all over the constitution.
-
Oh, wait, no. It's white militia, offshoot of Cliven Bundy
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/02/3735576/150-armed-militia-members-take-over-federal-building/
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/01/drama_in_burns_ends_with_quiet.html
Fail to see your point here Tim. Seems you get a lot of your info from the one sided extreme left rag "think progress".
-
Fail to see your point here Tim. Seems you get a lot of your info from the one sided extreme left rag "think progress".
point out something on there that is false
and my point is that if this was BLM, it would be covered 24-7 on every cable news network.
-
Good for them. Many non-Americans and even some Americans have no idea how offend our government and law enforcement shits all over the constitution.
What's the justification for protecting two criminals? Were these men wrongly convicted?
-
I love a good, all-white militia personally
-
Anyone been killed by this "Militia" yet?
Did they go in and shoot up the place? Killing a bunch of innocent people?
-
Anyone been killed by this "Militia" yet?
Did they go in and shoot up the place? Killing a bunch of innocent people?
I assume you mean that BLM has. They haven't
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34135267
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/black-lives-matter-violence-cops_55e77d82e4b0c818f61a9de8
-
Farmers often do controlled burns to prep/clear land
-
point out something on there that is false
and my point is that if this was BLM, it would be covered 24-7 on every cable news network.
Exactly, the media would be pumping up those brave black men that stand up to the oppressive government, but because they're white they'll be labeled criminals, radicals, racists and probably terrorists.
-
Farmers often do controlled burns to prep/clear land
But was the land protected, etc? They are obviously being charged with arson for a reason.
I tried to find an answer, but nothing!!
-
The idea of citizens standing up to the government is so unthinkable to some people(especially liberals). That's why the government fearlessly shit on us and wipes their ass with the Constitution.
It's funny but when a Republican was President all these same people were acting like Che Guevara. What happened to all those revolutionaries? lol.
I don't know who is in the wrong here. I just hope nobody gets killed and justice prevails.
-
from the Cliven Bundy standoff a few years ago, this is a militia member pointing his assault rifle at federal officers. If he had not been white, he would have not survived the day.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/04/13/article-2603026-1D103FEC00000578-811_634x439.jpg)
-
I assume you mean that BLM has. They haven't
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34135267
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/black-lives-matter-violence-cops_55e77d82e4b0c818f61a9de8
I didn't say that.
I asked if anyone had been killed.
This hasn't become violent yet as far as I'm aware though... since you decided to go down that road.
Unlike.
https://www.rt.com/usa/217835-oakland-protest-black-violence/?
-
But was the land protected, etc? They are obviously being charged with arson for a reason.
I tried to find an answer, but nothing!!
http://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/eastern-oregon-ranchers-convicted-arson-resentenced-five-years-prison
by the way, in southern california lots of homeless people have been charged with arson for unintentionally starting wildfires.
-
They've apparently occupied an unoccupied visitors center in a park. In winter. So benign that the right play would be to ignore them. But I am sure that the progressives (like Fogarty) are gonna demand blood, so expect a Waco/Ruby Ridge massacre soon.
Civil War 2 is coming. Thank God the progressives voluntarily disarmed and stopped reproducing decades ago.
-
OP is obviously in love with black cock.
-
i dont care their color, nor their political reasonings.
they're terrorists. Using violence and weapons to attempt (or succeed) overthrow a govt agency.
IF they were wearing turbands, we would have JDAM'd that building already. Since they're wearing Yankees hats, we're giving them a platform and tweeting rights. Screw that. you take out terrorists, no matter their color, no matter which political belief they're pushing. And while trump wants to take out their families too - I disagree with that part.
-
i dont care their color, nor their political reasonings.
they're terrorists. Using violence and weapons to attempt (or succeed) overthrow a govt agency.
IF they were wearing turbands, we would have JDAM'd that building already. Since they're wearing Yankees hats, we're giving them a platform and tweeting rights. Screw that. you take out terrorists, no matter their color, no matter which political belief they're pushing. And while trump wants to take out their families too - I disagree with that part.
I believe that "terrorism" requires somebody be terrified. The building was unoccupied. Get it right.
-
They've apparently occupied an unoccupied visitors center in a park. In winter. So benign that the right play would be to ignore them. But I am sure that the progressives (like Fogarty) are gonna demand blood, so expect a Waco/Ruby Ridge massacre soon.
If armed ISIS members illegally took over an empty govt building, we'd firebomb the motherfck out of that building.
Are these dudes armed? Creating a standoff, making threats, pushing their political agenda? The moment we excuse it because of their belief, we'd better be ready for the Occupy people, the BLM people, the Amish, the Bernies... to all do the same.
Maybe we don't kill them, maybe we just drop knockout gas so we can go in and arrest them without killing anyone. But in a fair country, every single one of them ends up in prison. You CANNOT allow people to illegally "take" govt buildings with weapons for their political belief... or the next building won't be empty.
-
I believe that "terrorism" requires somebody be terrified. The building was unoccupied. Get it right.
Which is why I'm okay with not killing them - but letting them have a national audience for longterm standoff? no way. Tear gas em, beanbag em, arrest them, end of story.
it's sunday... the post office is closed today. If I decide to take over, I'm going to jail immediately. there are way better ways to protest than "armed occupation of govt property". Cause if we allow it, then 50 arabs are going to load up their guns and "take over" and unoccupied govt building tomorrow... and everyone okay with it today wont be cool with that.
-
This obviously is inviting a massive over-reaction by the Feds which they will happily provide complete with bloodthirsty progressives cheering at the death of white people with different opinions from theirs. Because for progressives, a difference of opinion is a death sentence.
Again, the correct posture is to cut power, stop resupply and let winter smoke them out. But Tim Fogarty and his ilk demand DEATH, and they must be obeyed. So here comes the SRT teams to insure an inhumane gut-shot death.
I think that you will not like the final outcome however. Who is setting the trap for whom?
-
Well, it's a start. Need to shoot them some negros next.
-
This obviously is inviting a massive over-reaction by the Feds which they will happily provide complete with bloodthirsty progressives cheering at the death of white people with different opinions from theirs. Because for progressives, a difference of opinion is a death sentence.
Again, the correct posture is to cut power, stop resupply and let winter smoke them out. But Tim Fogarty and his ilk demand DEATH, and they must be obeyed. So here comes the SRT teams to insure an inhumane gut-shot death.
I think that you will not like the final outcome however. Who is setting the trap for whom?
why does ANYONE need to be setting a trap? Let's step back and think this through...
The people are there illegally. It's not their property.
these dudes, whatever their motivation - that ain't their property. they're just TAKING a building. It's not like the govt took it from them, or emminent domain, etc. They're just deciding to TAKE OVER a place that they dont own the deed to.
I'm not going down the road of "progressives' and politics - this is a simple legal issue. Hey dudes, this ain't your building... GTFO or we will arrest you. It's that simple. They're tresspassing and holding guns to ensure nobody can make them leave? Can't defend that.
-
BTW, the Oregon III% has nothing to do with this. It's strange out of state folks. I will post their official response when I get it.
I am turning into the Vince G. of the militia movement.
-
Militias are an awesome and completely legal thing. Keep the govt honest and exercise your right. That part is awesome.
Stealing buildings, trespassing.. That's just illegal. Militias need to follow law like everyone else.
-
Fail to see your point here Tim. Seems you get a lot of your info from the one sided extreme left rag "think progress".
Use any source you want...
Can you defend these dudes stealing a govt building? Simply put, it's not their property. If anything, it's quite liberal to just decide it's cool to take someone else's property.
It's just not their property. Any way to defend that?
-
Use any source you want...
Can you defend these dudes stealing a govt building? Simply put, it's not their property. If anything, it's quite liberal to just decide it's cool to take someone else's property.
It's just not their property. Any way to defend that?
So you are cool with shooting the BLM folks everytime they take over a mall or block a road? You have to be consistent in your application of force.
-
quiet so -do any of these qualify as terrorism?
Columbine High School massacre
Virginia Tech shooting
Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting
Goleta postal facility shooting
2010 ABB plant shooting
Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting
Christopher Dorner shooting
Oikos University shootings
Santa Monica, California shooting
Marysville Pilchuck High School shooting
Umpqua Community College shooting
Tucson, Arizona shooting
Red Lake, Minnesota shooting
Bailey, Colorado shooting
Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania shooting
University of Iowa shooting
Cleveland Elementary School shooting (she didn't lie Mondays)
Moreso than these fools in Oregon.
-
So you are cool with shooting the BLM folks everytime they take over a mall or block a road? You have to be consistent in your application of force.
I am. :D
-
Use any source you want...
Can you defend these dudes stealing a govt building? Simply put, it's not their property. If anything, it's quite liberal to just decide it's cool to take someone else's property.
It's just not their property. Any way to defend that?
Isn't Govt property owned by the citizenry?
-
Isn't Govt property owned by the citizenry?
To a progressive like 240, the citizenry is owned by the government.
-
I'm not sure what their point is in Oregon. I'm not sure I agree with those guys going back to jail after they've served their sentence either. What are they trying to accomplish by sitting in this building?
-
If armed ISIS members illegally took over an empty govt building, we'd firebomb the motherfck out of that building.
Are these dudes armed? Creating a standoff, making threats, pushing their political agenda? The moment we excuse it because of their belief, we'd better be ready for the Occupy people, the BLM people, the Amish, the Bernies... to all do the same.
Maybe we don't kill them, maybe we just drop knockout gas so we can go in and arrest them without killing anyone. But in a fair country, every single one of them ends up in prison. You CANNOT allow people to illegally "take" govt buildings with weapons for their political belief... or the next building won't be empty.
Good thing you weren't around in 1776, it would be about time for tea and crumpets, ya fucking wanker.
Besides ".gov" buildings are paid for and maintained with tax dollars, so it belongs to the people, just like .gov works for the people
-
Militias are an awesome and completely legal thing. Keep the govt honest and exercise your right. That part is awesome.
Stealing buildings, trespassing.. That's just illegal. Militias need to follow law like everyone else.
240, you are the voice of reason!
-
240, you are the voice of treason!
Fixed
-
Use any source you want...
Can you defend these dudes stealing a govt building? Simply put, it's not their property. If anything, it's quite liberal to just decide it's cool to take someone else's property.
It's just not their property. Any way to defend that?
Then who's property is it?
-
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
I don't see any restriction on where the protest can take place.
-
Fixed
240 is only alluding to the fact that these men broke a law. Nothing more, nothing less.
Obviously, there is a huge difference between laws, and its affect on others. Apparently, these men are occupying a building that is vacant. So, whatever. If there were people inside, and they were being held as hostages, different story. But its vacant. I wont lose sleep over it. Nonetheless, they did break some laws. We shall see what comes of it.
-
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
I don't see any restriction on where the protest can take place.
Well, obviously, there are definitely restrictions on where a group can protest. But that is besides the point.
This is a government building, and I am assuming you just can't walk into it and occupy it. Is this building open to the public for use?
Serious question.
-
Well, obviously, there are definitely restrictions on where a group can protest. But that is besides the point.
This is a government building, and I am assuming you just can't walk into it and occupy it. Is this building open to the public for use?
Serious question.
What are the restrictions? What .gov says? The government doesn't own anything, their income is based on taxes, therefore anything .gov claims to won belongs to the people.
-
What are the restrictions? What .gov says? The government doesn't own anything, their income is based on taxes, therefore anything .gov claims to won belongs to the people.
Well, restrictions in the private sense (obviously).
So, a person can walk into any government building and protest? The white house too?
-
Well, restrictions in the private sense (obviously).
So, a person can walk into any government building and protest? The white house too?
They should be able too, but of course .gov will act completely unconstitutionally and prevent them from doing so. I already posted what the constitution says.
-
Then who's property is it?
It belongs to the federal govt.
Imagine 150 armed Muslims taking over a federal building until 2 of their incarcerated friends were released.
The more I read about this case, the more I see this as a real crime. It's not their property.
-
They should be able too, but of course .gov will act completely unconstitutionally and prevent them from doing so. I already posted what the constitution says.
Any American should be able to break into any federal building and refuse to leave? I'm baffled by this post. This cannot devolve into whether any person should be allowed to just take over their local post office or courthouse whenever they feel like it
-
It belongs to the federal govt.
Imagine 150 armed Muslims taking over a federal building until 2 of their incarcerated friends were released.
The more I read about this case, the more I see this as a real crime. It's not their property.
Your a fucking moron, nothing belongs to the federal government, it belongs to the people, we fucking pay for it.
-
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
I don't see any restriction on where the protest can take place.
Peaceably assemble legally- don't break into a govt property then squat until your convict friends are released.
Imagine the backlash if this works. Should we all "occupy" a local courthouse or the dmv until our weed buddies' sentences are exonerated?
-
Any American should be able to break into any federal building and refuse to leave? I'm baffled by this post. This cannot devolve into whether any person should be allowed to just take over their local post office or courthouse whenever they feel like it
No not when ever they feel like it, read the 1st amendment again: or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
-
Your a fucking moron, nothing belongs to the federal government, it belongs to the people, we fucking pay for it.
We pay for the white house. We pay for Fort Knox. We pay for military bases.
Suppose I want to "occupy" any of these places with rifles until my demands for felons I know to be released?
They're criminals.
-
Peaceably assemble legally- don't break into a govt property then squat until your convict friends are released.
Imagine the backlash if this works. Should we all "occupy" a local courthouse or the dmv until our weed buddies' sentences are exonerated?
I don't see the word legally anywhere is the 1st amendment
-
We pay for the white house. We pay for Fort Knox. We pay for military bases.
Suppose I want to "occupy" any of these places with rifles until my demands for felons I know to be released?
They're criminals.
Just because they have weapons doesn't mean shit, no one was shot, there for the protest is peaceful
-
We pay for the white house. We pay for Fort Knox. We pay for military bases.
Suppose I want to "occupy" any of these places with rifles until my demands for felons I know to be released?
They're criminals.
And your a sheep who seems to think .gov is more important than everyone else and should be able to ignore the constitution at their convenience.
-
240 is only alluding to the fact that these men broke a law. Nothing more, nothing less.
Obviously, there is a huge difference between laws, and its affect on others. Apparently, these men are occupying a building that is vacant. So, whatever. If there were people inside, and they were being held as hostages, different story. But its vacant. I wont lose sleep over it. Nonetheless, they did break some laws. We shall see what comes of it.
Which law did they break?
How do you feel about the two guys being sent back to jail years after already serving their original sentence?
-
Which law did they break?
How do you feel about the two guys being sent back to jail years after already serving their original sentence?
Didn't they occupy a government building? Is that considered breaking the law? I always assumed that would at least qualify as trespassing. No?
-
And your a sheep who seems to think .gov is more important than everyone else and should be able to ignore the constitution at their convenience.
it's not a legal assembly spot.
what if I want to hold an illegal assembly with 150 men with rifles at the white house or fort knox? It's prison time for my ass. Why should these dudes be allowed to tresspass with weapons on land they don't own?
-
How do you feel about the two guys being sent back to jail years after already serving their original sentence?
I don't like it, but there are legal means for dealing with it... not loading up 150 men with rifles for a standoff.
would everyone be supporting it if it was 150 muslims doing the exact same thing?
-
it's not a legal assembly spot.
what if I want to hold an illegal assembly with 150 men with rifles at the white house or fort knox? It's prison time for my ass. Why should these dudes be allowed to tresspass with weapons on land they don't own?
Who says they're trespassing?
-
I don't like it, but there are legal means for dealing with it... not loading up 150 men with rifles for a standoff.
would everyone be supporting it if it was 150 muslims doing the exact same thing?
If they're American citizens peacefully protesting, I'm fine with it.
-
it's not a legal assembly spot.
what if I want to hold an illegal assembly with 150 men with rifles at the white house or fort knox? It's prison time for my ass. Why should these dudes be allowed to tresspass with weapons on land they don't own?
Here we go again, then what exactly is a legal assembly spot? You seem to think .gov gets to tell people where they can protest, which of course negates the whole concept laid out in the constitution.
-
I don't like it, but there are legal means for dealing with it... not loading up 150 men with rifles for a standoff.
would everyone be supporting it if it was 150 muslims doing the exact same thing?
What the fuck do Muslims have to do with this?
-
I don't like it, but there are legal means for dealing with it... not loading up 150 men with rifles for a standoff.
would everyone be supporting it if it was 150 muslims doing the exact same thing?
Are you saying that these men believe that everyone that doesn't agree with them should be beheaded? Comparing these protesters to a group of people that would disembowel you and fuck your small intestines in the name of their "god"? Really? Pretty low, even for someone as scummy as you.
-
Here we go again, then what exactly is a legal assembly spot? You seem to think .gov gets to tell people where they can protest, which of course negates the whole concept laid out in the constitution.
Are there spots where people should not be allowed to protest, that are not government buildings?
-
Are there spots where people should not be allowed to protest, that are not government buildings?
Doesn't seem to matter when #blacklivesmatter, blocks traffic and shoppers on the mag mile in Chicago, so why should it be different for anyone else?
-
What the fuck do Muslims have to do with this?
If they were Muslim Americans and not hurting anybody, simply protesting, then I wouldn't care about them. Not citizens, here illegally? JDAM.
-
If they were Muslim Americans and not hurting anybody, simply protesting, then I wouldn't care about them. Not citizens, here illegally? JDAM.
Its just more of 240's grabastic bullshit trying to derail things when he no longer has any ammo for the original point of the post.
-
Its just more of 240's grabastic bullshit trying to derail things when he no longer has any ammo for the original point of the post.
Yes, but you tried to derail my question by alluding to BLM. Not much different than 240 derailing to muslims.
If we are going to stick to the topic, then lets stick to the actual topic, which is X people occupying a government building in Oregon, and stay within the confines of those parameters.
-
Yes, but you tried to derail my question by alluding to BLM. Not much different than 240 derailing to muslims.
If we are going to stick to the topic, then lets stick to the actual topic, which is X people occupying a government building in Oregon, and stay within the confines of those parameters.
I never said one damn thing about BLM. Correction, only in response to your question about where people should be able to protest.
-
Yes, but you tried to derail my question by alluding to BLM. Not much different than 240 derailing to muslims.
If we are going to stick to the topic, then lets stick to the actual topic, which is X people occupying a government building in Oregon, and stay within the confines of those parameters.
No, BLM is on-topic. If you're going to advocate deadly force against American citizens occupying government property, then it has to be consistently applied. Blocking a road = occupying an unoccupied building. Deal with it.
-
??? ??? ??? ???
You said, "Doesn't seem to matter when #blacklivesmatter, blocks traffic and shoppers on the mag mile in Chicago, so why should it be different for anyone else?"
(http://i68.tinypic.com/2czad83.png)
I read the post to fast, but have since corrected my response
-
I read the post to fast, but have since corrected my response
Okay, then I will remove my response.
-
I read the post to fast, but have since corrected my response
Well, its a moot point, because I don't agree with black people or anyone blocking highways or stores that interfere with other people. A person's ability to protest ends when it affects another person's livelihood (getting to a job to earn a living to feed their family's, endangers their lives, etc.).
-
Well, its a moot point, because I don't agree with black people or anyone blocking highways or stores that interfere with other people. A person's ability to protest ends when it affects another person's livelihood (getting to a job to earn a living to feed their family's, endangers their lives, etc.).
Sounds fairly libertarian. Perhaps there's hope for you yet. Libertarian creed: your right to swing your fist ends precisely at my chin.
-
Yes, but you tried to derail my question by alluding to BLM. Not much different than 240 derailing to muslims.
If we are going to stick to the topic, then lets stick to the actual topic, which is X people occupying a government building in Oregon, and stay within the confines of those parameters.
And I will further expand on this, why does .gov get to decide which protest of redress of grievances is legal and which is not? The constitution contains the bill of rights, which are natural rights that .gov is constitutionally restricted from interfering with.
-
And I will further expand on this, why does .gov get to decide which protest of redress of grievances is legal and which is not? The constitution contains the bill of rights, which are natural rights that .gov is constitutionally restricted from interfering with.
"Our" government found the Constitution to be an impediment a century ago and has been steadily eroding it through micro cuts since then.
"A republic, if you can keep it" -- B. Franklin
-
And I will further expand on this, why does .gov get to decide which protest of redress of grievances is legal and which is not? The constitution contains the bill of rights, which are natural rights that .gov is constitutionally restricted from interfering with.
hmm, well, that is the thing, I don't know if there is a difference in terms of the law when it comes to how one occupies federal land during a protest. I don't know if there is a difference in terms of standing outside of a government building and protesting, as opposed to entering the government building and protesting. I admit, I do not know. I ASSUMED once you ENTERED the property of a building, it was breaking some sort of law, as opposed to standing outside. So, I admit, I do not know if there are nuances differences between the two. My initial assumptions may be wrong.
-
Well, its a moot point, because I don't agree with black people or anyone blocking highways or stores that interfere with other people. A person's ability to protest ends when it affects another person's livelihood (getting to a job to earn a living to feed their family's, endangers their lives, etc.).
It's really not moot, since it was allowed to go on, .gov has by inaction endorsed it.
-
It's really not moot, since it was allowed to go on, .gov has by inaction endorsed it.
Well, I meant a moot point to try and use that analogy with me, since I agree with you.
It may better well be served as an argument against 240, because he may disagree with you. :D :D
-
hmm, well, that is the thing, I don't know if there is a difference in terms of the law when it comes to how one occupies federal land during a protest. I don't know if there is a difference in terms of standing outside of a government building and protesting, as opposed to entering the government building and protesting. I admit, I do not know. I ASSUMED once you ENTERED the property of a building, it was breaking some sort of law, as opposed to standing outside. So, I admit, I do not know if there are nuances differences between the two. My initial assumptions may be wrong.
Well it depends on the circumstance I guess, since a federal building is public property then it is open to protest, now if a group tried to occupy a private business or residence they would be trespassing, if no consent from the property owner.
-
Well it depends on the circumstance I guess, since a federal building is public property then it is open to protest, now if a group tried to occupy a private business or residence they would be trespassing, if no consent from the property owner.
Well, yes, I 100% agree that you cannot enter a private business or someone's home to protest, unless given permission. I think the law is quite clear on that. If you do, then you deserve all the consequences that come to you.
I found this:
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/faq/frequently-asked-questions-assembly
In sum, there is no unfettered right to protest on government property. Protests must be peaceable, and the government has the right to impose content-neutral, reasonable time, place and manner restrictions on expression. Furthermore, as the Supreme Court said in Kokinda, “the government’s ownership of property does not automatically open that property to the public.”
The government has greater power to regulate expression when it acts as a proprietor controlling its internal operations than it does as a sovereign lawmaker. This means that government officials could limit protests inside a courthouse because the government has important operations to conduct. It must be able to control its operations to carry out its functions. The government must be able to carry on its own speech and expression free from interference. Contrast this with the public sidewalks two blocks from a courthouse. Here, the government cannot argue that it is conducting its own internal operations. Speech restrictions there would implicate a forum analysis and trigger a higher degree of judicial scrutiny.
The second point was already established between us, since a protest cannot interfere with the functioning of an individual.
-
An American Hero
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/04/13/article-2603026-1D103FEC00000578-811_634x439.jpg)
-
An American Hero
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/04/13/article-2603026-1D103FEC00000578-811_634x439.jpg)
Rolling with a derped-out '74 with no optics. Might want to upgrade to a legit overwatch rifle.
-
No, BLM is on-topic. If you're going to advocate deadly force against American citizens occupying government property, then it has to be consistently applied. Blocking a road = occupying an unoccupied building. Deal with it.
BLM is on topic. My original title of this thread was BLM occupy federal building in Oregon for a reason, to point out the hypocrisy of the right. Civil disobedience has it's place. I've participated in it on more than one occasion. But a bunch of BLM protesters (or Occupation Wall Street) block an intersection, and right wing talk radio and cable news calls them terrorists. Yet these white guys show up with their assault weapons and they're patriots.
As far as expect another Ruby or Waco, the last time Cliven Bundy's militia showed up with their assault weapons, the feds kept their distance. If only they would do the same for BLM or OWS.
-
Well, its a moot point, because I don't agree with black people or anyone blocking highways or stores that interfere with other people. A person's ability to protest ends when it affects another person's livelihood (getting to a job to earn a living to feed their family's, endangers their lives, etc.).
you don't know anything about the history of the civil rights movement. if it weren't for blocking highways and businesses, we'd still have Jim Crow laws.
but kind of hard to claim peaceable protest when you're caring assault weapons. the purpose of terrorism is to intimidate others into your way of thinking. what is the purpose of carrying assault weapons?
-
you don't know anything about the history of the civil rights movement. if it weren't for blocking highways and businesses, we'd still have Jim Crow laws.
::)
Oh brother. You're REALLY comparing the BLM retards to the civil rights movement? Brother, you need to take a deep blunt and sit down.
-
you don't know anything about the history of the civil rights movement. if it weren't for blocking highways and businesses, we'd still have Jim Crow laws.
Stop being stupid.
So, youre okay with people blocking highways that preclude people from getting to their job? What if person X needs to get to their job to feed their family? And lets say this person doesn't make much, and missing one day of pay will determine if they put food on the table for their kids? You're okay with this? If you are, then you are a bigger idiot than the rest of the forum actually thinks, and this is coming from someone who actually agrees with you on some of the points you make. But, you just showed that you really don't care about people; you only care about people when it fits your agenda. You don't care that person X has to get to work to feed their kids. You're a vile piece of garbage.
-
Oh brother. You're REALLY comparing the BLM retards to the civil rights movement? Brother, you need to take a deep blunt and sit down.
this says it all
-
So, youre okay with people blocking highways that preclude people from getting to their job? What if person X needs to get to their job to feed their family? And lets say this person doesn't make much, and missing one day of pay will determine if they put food on the table for their kids? You're okay with this. If you are, then you are a bigger idiot than the rest of the forum actually thinks, and this is coming from someone who agrees with you, probably more than most here.
I have sat in the middle of major intersections with a few thousand other protestors on more than one occasion. we blocked traffic for a while, got on the evening news, and moved on. tell me a more effective way to peaceably get your point across
-
I have sat in the middle of major intersections with a few thousand other protestors on more than one occasion. we blocked traffic for a while, got on the evening news, and moved on. tell me a more effective way to peaceably get your point across
Mass suicide?
-
I have sat in the middle of major intersections with a few thousand other protestors on more than one occasion. we blocked traffic for a while, got on the evening news, and moved on. tell me a more effective way to peaceably get your point across
Then you're a vile piece of shit. You literally could have cost a child a meal for a night, since many people need to get to work to feed their family. But who cares about that child, right? Because you have YOUR agenda. What if person X was fired because he didn't make it to work that day? You're disgusting trash.
-
Then you're a vile piece of shit. You literally could have cost a child a meal for a night, since many people need to get to work to feed their family. But who cares about that child, right? Because you have YOUR agenda. You're disgusting trash.
was it also wrong to do in the 1950s for civil rights, 60s and 70s against the war in Vietnam, 80s and 90s for gay rights? what progress would we have had if not for such marches and sit ins?
-
was it also wrong to do in the 1950s for civil rights, 60s and 70s against the war in Vietnam, 80s and 90s for gay rights? what progress would we have had if not for such marches and sit ins?
Is it wrong to limit someone's ability to get to work to feed their kids and pay their bills because of your protest?
Are you against limiting someone's livelihood, in order to protest your rights?
I am all for peaceful protest, EXCEPT when it limits the livelihood of someone. This includes being able to get to work to earn a living. Once your protests impede someone elses ability to function in society, then you need to shut up and move on.
-
Is it wrong to limit someone's ability to get to work to feed their kids and pay their bills because of your protest?
Are you against limiting someone's livelihood, in order to protest your rights?
Rosa Parks et al shut down the Montgomery Bus System for 381 days. that affected a lot of bus drivers and a lot of businesses that depended on customers using the bus system. was that protest wrong because it limited lots of people's livelihood?
-
Rosa Parks et al shut down the Montgomery Bus System for 381 days. that affected a lot of bus drivers and a lot of businesses that depended on customers using the bus system. was that protest wrong because it limited lots of people's livelihood?
Absolutely.
And although I am not registered as a democrat, this is coming from someone who probably has more liberal leanings (pro gay marriage, pro abortion, pro LGBT rights, etc.) than most here.
But even I could recognize hypocrisy and stupidity. And you, sir, fit both criteria.
-
Absolutely.
And although I am not registered as a democrat, this is coming from someone who probably has more liberal leanings (pro gay marriage, pro abortion, etc.) than most here.
But even I could recognize hypocrisy and stupidity. And you, sir, fit both criteria.
you think any civil right gains would have happen without demonstrations, protests and sit-ins? what alternative is there? other than violent revolution.
-
Good for them. Many non-Americans and even some Americans have no idea how offend our government and law enforcement shits all over the constitution.
Moaning cry baby. Try living in say russia or the middle east for one year. You don't realize how well off and lucky you americans are
-
you think any civil rights would have happen without demonstrations, protests and sit-ins? what alternative is there? other than violent revolution.
I am fine with demonsrtrations, protests and sit-ins, as long as it doesn't affect other peoples livelihood.
For example, I went to an undergrad, liberal oriented school in NYC. I didnt attend the school because it was liberally oriented. I went because it had a good psychology program. Anyway, they were protesting the war. So, a bunch of kids were protesting by painting their bodies with red (to signify the death of innocent civilians). They were laying outside on the ground, right near the front entrance to the main building. I was fine with that, because I just walked around them, and entered the building to get to class. However, if they were blocking my ability to enter the building, which made me miss class, that is when they need to have their asses forceably removed. And I'd be happy to do it myself. :D :D
-
you think any civil rights would have happen without demonstrations, protests and sit-ins? what alternative is there? other than violent revolution.
Silly man. You know the answer but instead will listen only to the voices in your otherwise empty head.
-
Oh, wait, no. It's white militia, offshoot of Cliven Bundy
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/02/3735576/150-armed-militia-members-take-over-federal-building/
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/01/drama_in_burns_ends_with_quiet.html
-
By SF's standards, the "militia" occupying an otherwise empty and unused building are impeding exactly zero people. Ergo, the real terrorists are the BLM in this story. I endorse this narrative.
-
Stop being stupid.
So, youre okay with people blocking highways that preclude people from getting to their job? What if person X needs to get to their job to feed their family? And lets say this person doesn't make much, and missing one day of pay will determine if they put food on the table for their kids? You're okay with this? If yo are, then you are a bigger idiot than the rest of the forum actually thinks, and this is coming from someone who actually agrees with you on some of the points you make. But, you just showed that you really don't care about people; you only care about people when it fits your agenda. You don't care that person X has to get to work to feed their kids. You're a vile piece of garbage.
As for protests blocking roads and commuter trains etc etc etc, which cause many regular people to turn against those protesting, I'd like to know exactly who the organizers are. They are organizing efforts that couldn't possibly be more counter-productive to the cause they are supposedly trying to advance, and they know it.
???
It doesn't make sense.
If politicians or other key figures (relevant to the source of protest) were surrounded by angry mobs, wouldn't that be the most direct and effective way to get the point across?
-
As for protests blocking roads and commuter trains etc etc etc, which cause many regular people to turn against those protesting, I'd like to know exactly who the organizers are. They are organizing efforts that couldn't possibly be more counter-productive to the cause they are supposedly trying to advance, and they know it.
???
It doesn't make sense.
If politicians or other key figures (relevant to the source of protest) were surrounded by angry armed mobs, wouldn't that be the most direct and effective way to get the point across?
Fixed it for maximum effectiveness.
-
Are you saying that these men believe that everyone that doesn't agree with them should be beheaded? Comparing these protesters to a group of people that would disembowel you and fuck your small intestines in the name of their "god"? Really? Pretty low, even for someone as scummy as you.
Not the same, but what they are doing is wrong.
Also, will anyone be shocked if the Feds go in there and lay waste to everyone?
I mean, certainly they aren't killing people, but let's be honest, if someone went into a court house by you and just took it over, would you be shocked if they all ended up dead?
I don't see this ending well.
-
Not the same, but what they are doing is wrong.
Also, will anyone be shocked if the Feds go in there and lay waste to everyone?
I mean, certainly they aren't killing people, but let's be honest, if someone went into a court house by you and just took it over, would you be shocked if they all ended up dead?
I don't see this ending well.
If it was the BLM retards taking over the courthouse, the Feds would give them a 99-year lease to stay. And if any of the locals decided to move them out, the DoJ would prosecute them for civil rights violations.
-
By SF's standards, the "militia" occupying an otherwise empty and unused building are impeding exactly zero people. Ergo, the real terrorists are the BLM in this story. I endorse this narrative.
I stated 2 pages ago that if the building is empty, I really don't care if they occupy it. However, if there were people inside (hostages) and they were being forced to stay, a whole different story. I wont lose any sleep over a bunch of gun nutters ( ;) ) occupying a vacant building.
-
If it was the BLM retards taking over the courthouse, the Feds would give them a 99-year lease to stay. And if any of the locals decided to move them out, the DoJ would prosecute them for civil rights violations.
I disagree.
-
Not the same, but what they are doing is wrong.
Also, will anyone be shocked if the Feds go in there and lay waste to everyone?
I mean, certainly they aren't killing people, but let's be honest, if someone went into a court house by you and just took it over, would you be shocked if they all ended up dead?
I don't see this ending well.
I think it definitely becomes a more "sticky" situation when the federal building has A LOT of people occupying it, especially a court house, and if children are present. I am not necessarily saying they can't protest, but when there is people inside the building, who knows.
I found this:
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/faq/frequently-asked-questions-assembly
In sum, there is no unfettered right to protest on government property. Protests must be peaceable, and the government has the right to impose content-neutral, reasonable time, place and manner restrictions on expression. Furthermore, as the Supreme Court said in Kokinda, “the government’s ownership of property does not automatically open that property to the public.”
The government has greater power to regulate expression when it acts as a proprietor controlling its internal operations than it does as a sovereign lawmaker. This means that government officials could limit protests inside a courthouse because the government has important operations to conduct. It must be able to control its operations to carry out its functions. The government must be able to carry on its own speech and expression free from interference. Contrast this with the public sidewalks two blocks from a courthouse. Here, the government cannot argue that it is conducting its own internal operations. Speech restrictions there would implicate a forum analysis and trigger a higher degree of judicial scrutiny.
-
Fixed it for maximum effectiveness.
Hard to deny it.
Isn't it strange, though, that we see these rambling, pointless events which do nothing but hurt the livelihoods of good, innocent people, while being ready-made for every POS criminal to show up prepared for burning and looting.
Something doesn't add up.
-
As for protests blocking roads and commuter trains etc etc etc, which cause many regular people to turn against those protesting, I'd like to know exactly who the organizers are. They are organizing efforts that couldn't possibly be more counter-productive to the cause they are supposedly trying to advance, and they know it.
???
It doesn't make sense.
If politicians or other key figures (relevant to the source of protest) were surrounded by angry mobs, wouldn't that be the most direct and effective way to get the point across?
I get people who are protesting are protesting for a reason. They are frustrated about something. And they have a right to their frustration--although I may or may not agree with their frustration--and they have a right to vent that frustration via a peaceful protest.
They don't have a right to hinder other people from performing their daily functions in society (school, work, etc.).
-
the BLM protesters at the mall WERE arrested. And I didn't see if they were armed to the teeth.
-
question...
did they break into the "closed" building they're occupying?
Cause it seems odd the govt would leave a closed building unlocked.
-
I get people who are protesting are protesting for a reason. They are frustrated about something. And they have a right to their frustration--although I may or may not agree with their frustration--and they have a right to vent that frustration via a peaceful protest.
They don't have a right to hinder other people from performing their daily functions in society (school, work, etc.).
In this instance, they are protesting a conviction. I mean, that's not how the criminal justice system in this country works.
People are found guilty. They can appeal.
This goes against everything this country is based on.
-
question...
did they break into the "closed" building they're occupying?
Cause it seems odd the govt would leave a closed building unlocked.
I do not know, but it is possible that wildlife refuge buildings are open for people to come in during nature hikes and things of that sort.
-
In this instance, they are protesting a conviction. I mean, that's not how the criminal justice system in this country works.
People are found guilty. They can appeal.
This goes against everything this country is based on.
I was speaking in more general terms, since the conversation has evolved (moving beyond what is happening in Oregon).
-
In this instance, they are protesting a conviction. I mean, that's not how the criminal justice system in this country works.
People are found guilty. They can appeal.
This goes against everything this country is based on.
They're protesting because these two guys have already served time, were released and now a judge is saying they need to serve more time.
-
btw, i mean the "protests" we've seen in the cities etc. i don't know much about this one in original post
-
once the forest ranger tells them to leave, then it's trespassing and they should be arrested.
Interesting... possessing a WEAPON while trespassing on federal lands esclalates the legal penalty by TWO levels:
http://www.ussc.gov/guidelines-manual/2011/2011-2b23
It may be prison time if they stay once asked to remove themselves. I'm not sure if they're aware of this part of it. A trespass protest when you're carrying a weapon is a very big big deal, particularly on federal property.
-
If it was the BLM retards taking over the courthouse, the Feds would give them a 99-year lease to stay. And if any of the locals decided to move them out, the DoJ would prosecute them for civil rights violations.
this shows the filter you see the world in. a few years ago Cliven Bundy and his followers (with assault weapons) had a standoff with federal marshals and the feds waited them out. Yet police have used buldozers and water to break up unarmed BLM protests. They did the same on OWS.
Civil disobedience means peacefully breaking minor laws to make a point, and willing to go to jail for your principles. Lots of civil rights leaders and followers have spent days, weeks, and months in jail. Are the members of this militia willing to go to jail for bringing assault weapons into a federal building to make their point? I didn't think so.
-
They're protesting because these two guys have already served time, were released and now a judge is saying they need to serve more time.
and they appealed, it was taken to the Supreme Court, and they lost.
-
I get people who are protesting are protesting for a reason. They are frustrated about something. And they have a right to their frustration--although I may or may not agree with their frustration--and they have a right to vent that frustration via a peaceful protest.
They don't have a right to hinder other people from performing their daily functions in society (school, work, etc.).
Get those people on your side, and you are strengthened. Cause them to be against you, and you are weakened.
So why do the organizers of these events want to weaken the fight, I wonder.
-
As for protests blocking roads and commuter trains etc etc etc, which cause many regular people to turn against those protesting, I'd like to know exactly who the organizers are. They are organizing efforts that couldn't possibly be more counter-productive to the cause they are supposedly trying to advance, and they know it.
the history of the civil rights movement in this country says otherwise. look how much progress we've made in the last 60 years. it would not have happened as quickly without peaceful civil disobedience.
but marching and occupying buildings while carrying signs is very different optics than occupying buildings while carrying assault weapons.
-
this shows the filter you see the world in. Cliven Bundy and his followers had a standoff with federal marshals and the feds waited them out. Yet police have used buldozers and water to break up BLM protests. They did the same on OWS.
you're right. I remember the Bundy groups stopping people, DEMANDING PAPERS. Sickening.
-
* They broke into the building. huge deal there. It was a closed facility and they breached a locked door.
I have to wonder how anyone here saying "it's their land, their taxes paid for it" have made it to adulthood. Do they feel entitled to break into closed govt buildings because "my taxes paid for it!!" ?
imagine having to drop a deuce, it's sunday, the post office is closed but you really gotta go now... so just kick down the door and use the potty. You paid taxes for that door, screw it.
-
once the forest ranger tells them to leave, then it's trespassing and they should be arrested.
Interesting... possessing a WEAPON while trespassing on federal lands esclalates the legal penalty by TWO levels:
http://www.ussc.gov/guidelines-manual/2011/2011-2b23
It may be prison time if they stay once asked to remove themselves. I'm not sure if they're aware of this part of it. A trespass protest when you're carrying a weapon is a very big big deal, particularly on federal property.
LOL, another violation of the constitution, where does it say that arms cannot be carried in federal buildings?
-
I have to wonder how anyone here saying "it's their land, their taxes paid for it" have made it to adulthood. Do they feel entitled to break into closed govt buildings because "my taxes paid for it!!" ?
and would they feel the same no matter who did it? is it just as ok for a non-white american to break into a federal building as a white american?
is it just as ok for a non-white person to "stand your ground" as a white person?
-
* They broke into the building. huge deal there. It was a closed facility and they breached a locked door.
I have to wonder how anyone here saying "it's their land, their taxes paid for it" have made it to adulthood. Do they feel entitled to break into closed govt buildings because "my taxes paid for it!!" ?
imagine having to drop a deuce, it's sunday, the post office is closed but you really gotta go now... so just kick down the door and use the potty. You paid taxes for that door, screw it.
Again you come out of left field with some stupid BS, is having to take a shit petitioning the government for a redress of grievances? Why don't you go work on your trigger discipline you goofy son of a bitch.
-
and would they feel the same no matter who did it? is it just as ok for a non-white american to break into a federal building as a white american?
is it just as ok for a non-white person to "stand your ground" as a white person?
Why wouldn't they?
Citizenship sees no color.
-
LOL, another violation of the constitution, where does it say that arms cannot be carried in federal buildings?
the constitution says congress can make laws. congress made a law
U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 44 › § 930
18 U.S. Code § 930 - Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/930
-
the constitution says congress can make laws. congress made a law
U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 44 › § 930
18 U.S. Code § 930 - Possession of firearms and dangerous weapons in Federal facilities
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/930
Congress cannot make laws that are direct violation of the bill of rights. Shit is congress can just pass a law that is a direct violation of the constitution, then what is the point of having a constitution?
-
the history of the civil rights movement in this country says otherwise. look how much progress we've made in the last 60 years. it would not have happened as quickly without peaceful civil disobedience.
but marching and occupying buildings while carrying signs is very different optics than occupying buildings while carrying assault weapons.
Are you saying it makes more sense to obstruct and hurt regular, mostly good, innocent people, than to directly confront law-makers etc? If that's what you mean, then what's the reasoning behind it?
-
Well, it's a start. Need to shoot them some negros next.
you mean like how the British used to shoot the Irish?...
-
Congress cannot make laws that are direct violation of the bill of rights
you can keep and bear arms, within limits that seem to change over time. Bazookas, grenade launchers and air to air missiles are not allowed at this time. but that doesn't mean you can go where ever you want while bearing them (airplanes, federal buildings)
-
you can keep and bear arms, within limits that seem to change over time. Bazookas, grenade launchers and air to air missiles are not allowed at this time. but that doesn't mean you can go where ever you want while bearing them (airplanes, federal buildings)
Why? More common sense laws from .gov? All this does is ensure, should there be a revolt because the populace finally got tired of .gov's bullshit, they would be completely out gunned.
-
Are you saying it makes more sense to obstruct and hurt regular, mostly good, innocent people, than to directly confront law-makers etc? If that's what you mean, then what's the reasoning behind it?
inconveniencing for a few hours or even a day or two, is not hurting. directly confronting law-makers doesn't seem to work when law-makers see you as less than human.
-
inconveniencing for a few hours or even a day or two, is not hurting. directly confronting law-makers doesn't seem to work when law-makers see you as less than human.
It does hurt hourly employees who can't get to work.
Someone making 10 bucks an hour feels a lot of pain when 2/5 of their pay is gone. (2 days of work during a work week)
-
Why? More common sense laws from .gov?
OK. Go do some civil disobedience to make your point. Try to bring a weapon onto a commercial airplane, get arrested, serve your time, and say it was all to show the injustice of the law. You'll be seen as a martyr to some.
-
OK. Go do some civil disobedience to make your point. Try to bring a weapon onto a commercial airplane, get arrested, serve your time, and say it was all to show the injustice of the law. You'll be seen as a martyr to some.
First of all I have no reason to bring a gun on an airplane or a federal building. But that is not the point, allowing .gov to arbitrarily make laws that infringe upon your natural rights is fucking stupid. So that begs the question, why can .gov get away with it? They just keep passing laws, then you need someone to challenge them, then it gets tied up in the courts for years. A wonderful strategy for .gov.
-
inconveniencing for a few hours or even a day or two, is not hurting. directly confronting law-makers doesn't seem to work when law-makers see you as less than human.
Hmmmmm, .gov see's you as less than human, but somehow the same bunch of sociopaths keep getting elected year after year.
-
inconveniencing for a few hours or even a day or two, is not hurting. directly confronting law-makers doesn't seem to work when law-makers see you as less than human.
How do you know? Who made you judge and jury? How do you know a few hours is not inconveniencing someone? What if that person has to get to an emergency meeting at his or her job? Stop being a self-righteous moron, and think about other people.
-
How do you know? Who made you judge and jury? How do you know a few hours is not inconveniencing someone? What if that person has to get to an emergency meeting at his or her job? Stop being a self-righteous moron, and think about other people.
He already said why a couple posts up, .gov doesn't pay attention, so fuck with everyone else's lively hood to get your point across. I guess the logic being is piss enough people off, they will push .gov to just give them what they want, so they can get on with their lives.
-
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Define "Keep": 1. have or retain possession of.
Define "Bear": 1. (of a person) carry.
To recap, the 2nd amendment says...that we have a God given right to keep and carry firearms. It doesn't say...the government allows you to own the firearms that they approve of as long as the magazine only holds X amount of bullets, and it's locked in a safe to protect the kiddies, and as long as it's not semi or fully automatic, and as long as you have a license, and as as long as you register them with the government so they know what you have, and as long as bad guys don't start shooting up schools, etc.
Other relevant definitions...
"Infringe": 1. to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another
"Encroach": 1. to enter by gradual steps or by stealth into the possessions or rights of another
-
He already said why a couple posts up, .gov doesn't pay attention, so fuck with everyone else's lively hood to get your point across. I guess the logic being is piss enough people off, they will push .gov to just give them what they want, so they can get on with their lives.
Talk about being a self-righteous prick. He only cares about his own agenda. Does not care about anyone else. So, the government doesn't care, so he will potentially mess with other peoples livelihood. Moron.
-
Hmmmmm, .gov see's you as less than human, but somehow the same bunch of sociopaths keep getting elected year after year.
yes, we live in an oligarchy. Citizens United made it worse. Until we get campaign finance reform, little will change. The NRA is gun manufacturer trade group, not a club for gun enthusiasts. The majority of Americans don't want to take away your guns, but do want some basic gun regulations. The power of the NRA prevents that from even being discussed.
-
Talk about being a self-righteous prick. He only cares about his own agenda. Does not care about anyone else. So, the government doesn't care, so he will potentially mess with other peoples livelihood. Moron.
You're basically saying the entire civil rights movement was immoral because someone might have lost a days salary.
-
yes, we live in an oligarchy. Citizens United made it worse. Until we get campaign finance reform, little will change. The NRA is gun manufacturer trade group, not a club for gun enthusiasts. The majority of Americans don't want to take away your guns, but do want some basic gun regulations. The power of the NRA prevents that from even being discussed.
See above post about the 2nd amendment, if you want to erode one Amendment whats to stop .gov from doing the same to the other 26? And campaign finance reform is not relevant, it is our responsibility as US citizens to elect our representatives, so we get the government we deserve.
-
LOL, another violation of the constitution, where does it say that arms cannot be carried in federal buildings?
rawstory.com has a reporter on the ground taking pics. check it out.
militia has seized the land and building. They have supplies and one claimed "I didn't come here to shoot, I came here to die".
They've blocked entrances with trucks, and have men armed with AR15s guarding the property. They plan to stay years. They've "reclaimed the lands".
They call themselves the Bundy Militia. They have name, badges, rank. "Captain Moroni", wearing military gear and name badge, came out to explain to reporters.
The FBI is in charge, since this is federal property. This militia has food, fuel, and lots of rifles. They've taken over federal property.
UM UM UM... at some point, this is treason. It's an armed uprising, seizing govt property and threatening to "not shoot, but kill". If these aren't terrorists, I dont know what the fck is.
IMAGINE dozens of muslims with rifles and supplies giving the finger to the US govt and taking over a govt building, promising bloodshed and saying they'll stay for years. LOL they'd be wasted already.
-
Why? More common sense laws from .gov? All this does is ensure, should there be a revolt because the populace finally got tired of .gov's bullshit, they would be completely out gunned.
kazan, please go to rawstory.com and read the tweets and see photos/interviews from the people on the ground.
I bet you'll stop defending these guys. This isn't a protest. They threatened to kill. This isn't a sit-in... they blocked the roads in. They promised to stay for years, and they have supplies for the winter. And there are AR15s everywhere.
At some point, I think you'll quietly realize this isn't just a couple of good ol' boys enjoying a public park on a closed day ;)
-
whitey, ready to die for his cause because god told him to, takes over a government building while armed.
not terrorism
???
-
You're basically saying the entire civil rights movement was immoral because someone might have lost a days salary.
Again, your right to protest ends once it interferes with my ability to function in society.
Thus, its a stupid comparison and totally missing the point. Damn, you're dumb.
-
rawstory.com has a reporter on the ground taking pics. check it out.
militia has seized the land and building. They have supplies and one claimed "I didn't come here to shoot, I came here to die".
They've blocked entrances with trucks, and have men armed with AR15s guarding the property. They plan to stay years. They've "reclaimed the lands".
They call themselves the Bundy Militia. They have name, badges, rank. "Captain Moroni", wearing military gear and name badge, came out to explain to reporters.
The FBI is in charge, since this is federal property. This militia has food, fuel, and lots of rifles. They've taken over federal property.
UM UM UM... at some point, this is treason. It's an armed uprising, seizing govt property and threatening to "not shoot, but kill". If these aren't terrorists, I dont know what the fck is.
IMAGINE dozens of muslims with rifles and supplies giving the finger to the US govt and taking over a govt building, promising bloodshed and saying they'll stay for years. LOL they'd be wasted already.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure.
-
You're basically saying the entire civil rights movement was immoral because someone might have lost a days salary.
I don't think that's a fair comparison at all.
Surely there are times when civil disobedience is a good thing, but every cause does not equate to that.
While I agree with the BLM premise, they are not doing themselves any favors. People jumping in front of cars and claiming they were "hit", when in fact, they stepped into them.
That's not civil disobedience.
Also, the BLM movement is refusing to acknowledge that the people who are dying are committing crimes and that is the precursor to most of the problems.
Although, BLM has absolutely nothing with what is going on here in Oregon at the moment, and yes, these people, if they find themselves dead, will have no one to blame but themselves.
Taking over a federal building of any sort is going to go poorly.
-
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure.
Perhaps, but isn't that considered breaking the law?
There initial plan may not have broken any laws, however, threats of violence now crosses the line into breaking the law. Im asking a question.
-
inconveniencing for a few hours or even a day or two, is not hurting. directly confronting law-makers doesn't seem to work when law-makers see you as less than human.
So when idiots are stealing shit and burning things down, etc, how do you think they're viewed?
-
yes, we live in an oligarchy. Citizens United made it worse. Until we get campaign finance reform, little will change. The NRA is gun manufacturer trade group, not a club for gun enthusiasts. The majority of Americans don't want to take away your guns, but do want some basic gun regulations. The power of the NRA prevents that from even being discussed.
The NRA is not a gun manufacturers trade group the National Shooting Sports Foundation is. http://www.nssf.org/about/
The majority of Americans don't want to take away your guns, but do want some basic gun regulations
Says who? The majority are as clueless as you are. There are currently over 50,000 ' basic gun regulations ' on the books already. The NRA ( which I'm NOT a member of for the record ) opposes even more useless attempts to punish law abiding citizens.
The power of the NRA prevents that from even being discussed.
Nonsense , see above. No denying the NRA isn't a powerful lobbying agency but law abiding citizens are tired of being punished for the actions of criminals and are speaking at the polls. " common sense " gun laws are code word for infringing on my rights and people are sick of it.
-
Perhaps, but isn't that considered breaking the law?
There initial plan may not have broken any laws, however, threats of violence now crosses the line into breaking the law. Im asking a question.
If that was the case there would be a hell of a lot more people in jail.
-
kazan, please go to rawstory.com and read the tweets and see photos/interviews from the people on the ground.
I bet you'll stop defending these guys. This isn't a protest. They threatened to kill. This isn't a sit-in... they blocked the roads in. They promised to stay for years, and they have supplies for the winter. And there are AR15s everywhere.
At some point, I think you'll quietly realize this isn't just a couple of good ol' boys enjoying a public park on a closed day ;)
The FBI better get Lon Horiuchi over there right away, he'll get this party started.
-
So when idiots are stealing shit and burning things down, etc, how do you think they're viewed?
Also a fair point.
Why does no one talk about the actual property destruction that has occurred under BLM.
I have no problem with peaceful protest, but when you start destroying buildings... Really, destroying your own fucking neighborhoods. Do you really think people pay any attention to you.
To bring the conversation full circle... You know whose places of work were left alone during the Rodney King riots?
The Asians.... Not because they were Asian, but because they had guns to protect their shops and the people running around and looting and destroying things knew damn well that the Asians would shoot them in a heart beat so they left their shit alone.
-
The FBI better get Lon Horiuchi over there right away, he'll get this party started.
Naw there are only men , no women holding babies.
-
Again, your right to protest ends once it interferes with my ability to function in society.
how did the civil rights protest, the anti war protests, the gay rights protests of the past not interfere with your ability to get around town? because you weren't born yet? because you didn't live near any of those protests?
or is it that hey we had lots of problems in the past, but we've fixed them all, and now no one has any reason to protest? So shut up and don't inconvenience me.
if you think that the civil rights protests of the past helped make the present a better place, then you must continue to support people's right to peaceful protest, even if it does occasionally inconvenience you.
-
Naw there are only men , no women holding babies.
I'm surprised anyone got that reference............
-
So when idiots are stealing shit and burning things down, etc, how do you think they're viewed?
yes, I see sports fans after a big win or loss as stupid.
-
Also a fair point.
Why does no one talk about the actual property destruction that has occurred under BLM.
I have no problem with peaceful protest, but when you start destroying buildings... Really, destroying your own fucking neighborhoods. Do you really think people pay any attention to you.
To bring the conversation full circle... You know whose places of work were left alone during the Rodney King riots?
The Asians.... Not because they were Asian, but because they had guns to protect their shops and the people running around and looting and destroying things knew damn well that the Asians would shoot them in a heart beat so they left their shit alone.
I haven't much looked at the main topic, but why do they claim these guys started that fire? To cover up evidence they'd been hunting? (sorry if that's a dumb question, but I really don't know about this one)
-
yes, I see sports fans after a big win or loss as stupid.
Meaning it reduces a serious issue to that of drunken, drugged recklessness. Isn't that true?
-
I haven't much looked at the main topic, but why do they claim these guys started that fire? To cover up evidence they'd been hunting? (sorry if that's a dumb question, but I really don't know about this one)
The other side of the story
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/03/full-story-on-whats-going-on-in-oregon-militia-take-over-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge-in-protest-to-hammond-family-persecution/#more-110497
-
You know whose places of work were left alone during the Rodney King riots?
The Asians.... Not because they were Asian, but because they had guns to protect their shops and the people running around and looting and destroying things knew damn well that the Asians would shoot them in a heart beat so they left their shit alone.
Nice talking point. Easily disproven. Asian shops had been moving into predominately black areas, making it harder for black owned businesses. Those Asian shops were all targeted during the riots.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Los_Angeles_riots (look for citation 27)
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0429/p01s07-ussc.html
-
I haven't much looked at the main topic, but why do they claim these guys started that fire? To cover up evidence they'd been hunting? (sorry if that's a dumb question, but I really don't know about this one)
That is what the courts determined.
They were found guilty of setting a fire to cover up poaching.
This burned 130 acres in 2001.
Another fire was also started in 2006.
The guys (The Hammonds) claim they were burning to stop reduce invasive plants. (Witnesses have said otherwise)
They have also stated they do not want the Bundy's (The people from Nevada) to assist them or back them in any way.
The Bundy's have also given zero demands. They are just doing this to do it.
-
Meaning it reduces a serious issue to that of drunken, drugged recklessness. Isn't that true?
No it's just a reflection of a morally bankrupt society, there was a time when people actually respected others property.
-
Meaning it reduces a serious issue to that of drunken, drugged recklessness. Isn't that true?
I see no evidence that actual BLM protesters are doing the rioting.
-
whitey, ready to die for his cause because god told him to, takes over a government building while armed.
not terrorism
???
America : Harry Reid labels Supporters of Rancher Cliven Bundy 'Domestic Terrorists' (Apr 18, 2014)
???
-
As this is politically motivated.
It is by definition terrorism.
The only difference is that they have not hurt anyone yet.
I expect this to end similarly to Waco.
-
America : Harry Reid labels Supporters of Rancher Cliven Bundy 'Domestic Terrorists' (Apr 18, 2014)
???
Harry Reid is an intellectual terrorist
-
I see no evidence that actual BLM protesters are doing the rioting.
Yet you cannot deny they are fully associated with it.
Isn't that a big problem?
-
Says who? The majority are as clueless as you are. There are currently over 50,000 ' basic gun regulations ' on the books already. The NRA ( which I'm NOT a member of for the record ) opposes even more useless attempts to punish law abiding citizens.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
-
Yet you cannot deny they are fully associated with it.
Isn't that a big problem?
There have been 1173 BLM protests in the last 1.5 years. Almost all of them have not been associated with property damage. Those that were, were done by outsiders.
https://elephrame.com/textbook/BLM?name=protests
-
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
That poll doesn't mean the politicians aren't trying to. from state to federal the left keeps trying , the second amendment be damned.
The point still stands , there are over 50K laws on the books already concerning guns , you don't think the " basics " have been covered?
-
whitey, ready to die for his cause because god told him to, takes over a government building while armed.
not terrorism
???
"I didn't come here to shoot... I came here to die" confesses one Oregon militia member. He was wearing his militia wear and claimed a rank. Doesn't respect US law.
It's "closed" because after seeing the militia take over and block roads, the order was given to employees not to come into work.
They've hung flags and blocked roads. They have years' worth of supplies. The armed militia would not allow people to enter the grounds, chasing them away. Photographers took pics but were chased away. Yes, these "protesters" are chasing away the media.
I don't know how "armed with rifles, blocking roads, chasing away outsiders and promising to kill" somehow equals "peaceful protesters".
Peace went out the window when they announced they were there to kill.
-
Are they patriots? Or are they businessmen trying to beat out their competition?
They want to turn over public lands to private developers... mining, grazing, logging, fracking...
they're wrapping themselves in a flag, but it's about money, right?
-
There have been 1173 BLM protests in the last 1.5 years. Almost all of them have not been associated with property damage. Those that were, were done by outsiders.
https://elephrame.com/textbook/BLM?name=protests
But doesn't it make it all the worse that common perception says otherwise?
-
But doesn't it make it all the worse that common perception says otherwise?
common perception only for listeners of right wing radio and Fox News
-
whitey, ready to die for his cause because god told him to, takes over a government building while armed.
not terrorism
???
It may not be due to "their God told them to..."
It's about corporate profits. They illegally used govt lands to gain a competitive advantage in the steer industry, and went to prison for it.
The few dozen jokers here decided IF they can get these 2 freed, then they can ALL steal use of closed lands for their own private profit. So they wrapped themselves up in the flag, grabbed rifles, and threatened others.
They're not religious zealots... they're using terror/threat of violence to make more money. What do we call that?
-
common perception only for listeners of right wing radio and Fox News
great point. I watch msn, cnn and fox daily. FOX radio in particular goes WAY into painting BLM as violent thugs.
But the BLM has never taken over a federal building... threatened to murder any that come close
and done it all to make more money from cattle. ???
-
Are they patriots? Or are they businessmen trying to beat out their competition?
They want to turn over public lands to private developers... mining, grazing, logging, fracking...
they're wrapping themselves in a flag, but it's about money, right?
I assume so, they are against government tyranny but want to replace it with full control of corporate power (a far more tyrannical set of institutions)....hmmmm ???
-
"I didn't come here to shoot... I came here to die" confesses one Oregon militia member. He was wearing his militia wear and claimed a rank. Doesn't respect US law.
It's "closed" because after seeing the militia take over and block roads, the order was given to employees not to come into work.
They've hung flags and blocked roads. They have years' worth of supplies. The armed militia would not allow people to enter the grounds, chasing them away. Photographers took pics but were chased away. Yes, these "protesters" are chasing away the media.
I don't know how "armed with rifles, blocking roads, chasing away outsiders and promising to kill" somehow equals "peaceful protesters".
Peace went out the window when they announced they were there to kill.
Wait your first quote says they didn't come to shoot but to die, then they are going to kill, which is it?
-
common perception only for listeners of right wing radio and Fox News
Watching or listening to any mainstream "news" causes it. It cannot be escaped in this media.
So why do you suppose the organizers of these events invite that to happen?
-
great point. I watch msn, cnn and fox daily. FOX radio in particular goes WAY into painting BLM as violent thugs.
But the BLM has never taken over a federal building... threatened to murder any that come close
and done it all to make more money from cattle. ???
Just because one group breaks laws differently, doesn't make them more or less criminals than another group who also breaks laws.
2 wrongs don't make a right?
BLM obviously has a more valid point than these clowns, but both are ridiculous in their own ways.
People who have jobs don't have time to take over buildings or march regularly.
As a note, people from BLM have threatened others... They just wash that under the rug because they are not "speaking for" BLM.
Remember though... The Bundys are not speaking for the convicted Hammonds here either.
-
great point. I watch msn, cnn and fox daily. FOX radio in particular goes WAY into painting BLM as violent thugs.
But the BLM has never taken over a federal building... threatened to murder any that come close
and done it all to make more money from cattle. ???
The decisions of BLM cover for thuggery, certainly, causing it to be very easy to make the association.
Time after time after time after time. Right?
-
common perception only for listeners of right wing radio and Fox News
AIDS is closer than you think
-
;D
-
Tim is a good guy. I agree with him on many things.
But I'd really like to know why this shit happens as it does. Something's not right.
-
;D
Hell yeah
-
Harry Reid is an intellectual terrorist
hmm Harry Reid calls these guys terrorists.
He says he's spoken to local law enforcement, the Department of Justice; Attorney General and the FBI in DETAIL
so I think he's feels pretty solid about that assessment. My review of the expert material is consistent with that (see the other thread).
many have claimed a bias in the media where whitey get's mislabelled as a terrorist.
so let's see how this gets reported and see where the bias is.
???
-
;D
The version with the intro of trumpets is better:
-
But I'd really like to know why this shit happens as it does. Something's not right.
Us vs Them. Everyone, no matter how libertarian, is all for society, institutions, government, helping Us, and either uncomfortable or downright hostile at helping Them. A tragedy strikes your family, you accept help from institutions. You like laws that protect Us. You don't like laws that protect Them.
The problem is the definition of Us vs Them. I like to think that people on the left have a much bigger definition of Us than those on the right. We're all in this together.
Another problem is whether this is a zero sum game. If They make progress, do We lose progress?
And another problem is when you lead your whole life thinking you're part of the ruling class and then it becomes apparent you're not. Across the US, white middle class has been losing ground the last 30 years. They blame it on minorities, when in fact they were losing to the white upper class.
And finally changing demographics. White heterosexual males have been the majority for all of this country's history, but that is changing. Already changed in places like California. White militia types are scared as shit of that.
-
People always bitch and moan about our tyrannical government and how something should be done, then when someone does something people shit all over them.
-
hmm Harry Reid calls these guys terrorists.
He says he's spoken to local law enforcement, the Department of Justice; Attorney General and the FBI in DETAIL
so I think he's feels pretty solid about that assessment. My review of the expert material is consistent with that (see the other thread).
many have claimed a bias in the media where whitey get's mislabelled as a terrorist.
so let's see how this gets reported and see where the bias is.
???
All federal agencies singing the same song, I'm shocked.
-
Us vs Them. Everyone, no matter how libertarian, is all for society, institutions, government, helping Us, and either uncomfortable or downright hostile at helping Them. A tragedy strikes your family, you accept help from institutions. You like laws that protect Us. You don't like laws that protect Them.
The problem is the definition of Us vs Them. I like to think that people on the left have a much bigger definition of Us than those on the right. We're all in this together.
Another problem is whether this is a zero sum game. If They make progress, do We lose progress?
And another problem is when you lead your whole life thinking you're part of the ruling class and then it becomes apparent you're not. Across the US, white middle class has been losing ground the last 30 years. They blame it on minorities, when in fact they were losing to the white upper class.
And finally changing demographics. White heterosexual males have been the majority for all of this country's history, but that is changing. Already changed in places like California. White militia types are scared as shit of that.
My definition of Us vs Them, is American citizens against an unconstitutional government. I don't care what race, creed, color, or sexual orientation you are, as Americans it is our duty to keep .gov honest. Unfortunately people get wrapped up in their own personal agenda and loose sight of the big picture.
-
Was this all really over jacking deer and burning land to cover the crime?
-
Us vs Them. Everyone, no matter how libertarian, is all for society, institutions, government, helping Us, and either uncomfortable or downright hostile at helping Them. A tragedy strikes your family, you accept help from institutions. You like laws that protect Us. You don't like laws that protect Them.
The problem is the definition of Us vs Them. I like to think that people on the left have a much bigger definition of Us than those on the right. We're all in this together.
Another problem is whether this is a zero sum game. If They make progress, do We lose progress?
And another problem is when you lead your whole life thinking you're part of the ruling class and then it becomes apparent you're not. Across the US, white middle class has been losing ground the last 30 years. They blame it on minorities, when in fact they were losing to the white upper class.
And finally changing demographics. White heterosexual males have been the majority for all of this country's history, but that is changing. Already changed in places like California. White militia types are scared as shit of that.
The first paragraph indicates that you haven't the foggiest notion of what a libertarian is.
-
The first paragraph indicates that you haven't the foggiest notion of what a libertarian is.
perhaps when tragedy or other crisis strikes, there are no real libertarians.
-
LOL @ Trying to excuse it because "Well, BLM did this and this..."
I guess Ted Bundy could have told the judge "Look bro, Hitler killed 6 million, what's the big deal about the 20 that I killed and ate?"
Sorry... each crime stands on its own merit, or demerit, in this case.
They brought guns, broke into a closed building, made threats. Because they want govt handouts on resources so their business can gain a competitive advantage.
-
LOL @ Trying to excuse it because "Well, BLM did this and this..."
I guess Ted Bundy could have told the judge "Look bro, Hitler killed 6 million, what's the big deal about the 20 that I killed and ate?"
Sorry... each crime stands on its own merit, or demerit, in this case.
They brought guns, broke into a closed building, made threats. Because they want govt handouts on resources so their business can gain a competitive advantage.
Well shit 240 has solved the case, I guess we can just end this thread ::)
-
perhaps when tragedy or other crisis strikes, there are no real libertarians.
Wrong again. We know how to take care of ourselves and our neighbors, thanks.
-
Wrong again. We know how to take care of ourselves and our neighbors, thanks.
That is a foreign concept to most
-
Was this all really over jacking deer and burning land to cover the crime?
it's pretty weird
-
White people, so desperate to work they are willing to go to these great lengths. If only other people had this drive ;D
-
Us vs Them. Everyone, no matter how libertarian, is all for society, institutions, government, helping Us, and either uncomfortable or downright hostile at helping Them. A tragedy strikes your family, you accept help from institutions. You like laws that protect Us. You don't like laws that protect Them.
The problem is the definition of Us vs Them. I like to think that people on the left have a much bigger definition of Us than those on the right. We're all in this together.
Another problem is whether this is a zero sum game. If They make progress, do We lose progress?
And another problem is when you lead your whole life thinking you're part of the ruling class and then it becomes apparent you're not. Across the US, white middle class has been losing ground the last 30 years. They blame it on minorities, when in fact they were losing to the white upper class.
And finally changing demographics. White heterosexual males have been the majority for all of this country's history, but that is changing. Already changed in places like California. White militia types are scared as shit of that.
No. It's really not.
Heterosexual males are still the majority by far in the US.
A percentage point over 30 years isn't going to make any real changes in my lifetime... Or yours.
-
why does ANYONE need to be setting a trap? Let's step back and think this through...
The people are there illegally. It's not their property.
these dudes, whatever their motivation - that ain't their property. they're just TAKING a building. It's not like the govt took it from them, or emminent domain, etc. They're just deciding to TAKE OVER a place that they dont own the deed to.
I'm not going down the road of "progressives' and politics - this is a simple legal issue. Hey dudes, this ain't your building... GTFO or we will arrest you. It's that simple. They're tresspassing and holding guns to ensure nobody can make them leave? Can't defend that.
Whose building is it? It's a federal building meaning it belongs to "the people". These men are "the people" and they are addressing grievances against the government.
-
Whose building is it? It's a federal building meaning it belongs to "the people". These men are "the people" and they are addressing grievances against the government.
While it sounds good, you and I both know that is not how this works.
-
Substitute armed blacks for armed whites in this situation...........what would the reaction be???..especially at Getbig??????????????????????????????????????????????
END OF THREAD
-
Was this all really over jacking deer and burning land to cover the crime?
That's exactly what started it.
Also, just a reminder, the Hammonds (the guilty party) are not involved in this situation currently.
-
Substitute armed blacks for armed whites in this situation...........what would the reaction be???..especially at Getbig??????????????????????????????????????????????
END OF THREAD
The liberals on facebook are already starting this argument. The 2 cultures are really too different to compare.
-
The liberals reasonable people on facebook are already starting this argument. The 2 cultures are really too different to compare.
FIXED FOR TRUTH
-
Substitute armed blacks for armed whites in this situation...........what would the reaction be???..especially at Getbig??????????????????????????????????????????????
END OF THREAD
black child steals candy at the store deserves to be shot in the back and assassinated
whitey armed to the teeth seizes government property is standing up for himself
lots of terrorist sympathizers up in this bitch
-
No. It's really not.
Heterosexual males are still the majority by far in the US.
A percentage point over 30 years isn't going to make any real changes in my lifetime... Or yours.
I certainly plan on living another 30 years.
(http://almanac.ushli.org/wp-content/themes/almanac/images/2012/Table1.10.jpg)
and in California, we're already there.
-
I certainly plan on living another 30 years.
(http://almanac.ushli.org/wp-content/themes/almanac/images/2012/Table1.10.jpg)
and in California, we're already there.
And in which graph are the white populace the minority?
That also doesn't speak on you specifically citing white heterosexual males.
That's just white people.
-
White males will still have the power and money regardless of them being in the minority.
-
White males will still have the power and money regardless of them being in the minority.
Then why are you guys so fucking scared all the time???
-
Then why are you guys so fucking scared all the time???
How many would be alive if they were black?
-
Then why are you guys so fucking scared all the time???
Ridiculous statement Andre.
Do you think people are just running around scared? Of what?
-
Ridiculous statement Andre.
Do you think people are just running around scared? Of what?
I suspect Andre means scared of losing power.
-
I suspect Andre means scared of losing power.
Most white people have no power anyway. So what could they lose?
-
Then why are you guys so fucking scared all the time???
Little disappointed at this attacking tone Andre, I thought we were always friends.
Was just stating a fact that whites have the majority of money and power.
As to your question I don't know but IMO it could have something to do with having a lot to lose. People with a lot have the fear of losing it and people with nothing really have nothing to fear because they can't lose anything.
-
Most white people have no power anyway. So what could they lose?
Agreed.
Perhaps he is referring to the white people "at the top."
-
As promised, here is the official response from the Oregon III%:
http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2016/01/no-more-free-wacos-national-three.html
TL;DR: we don't want this war, but if you start it, we will come.
No more free Wacos. A National Three Percent Declaration Regarding the Situation in Harney County, Oregon. "Why would I want to do that? There's plenty of you federal sonsabitches around here."
In 1996, common criminals calling themselves "the Montana Freemen," victimized their own neighbors in the community with fake liens and bank fraud. Eventually, the Federal authorities became involved and laid siege to their community. At the time, in the aftermath of Waco and Ruby Ridge, the FBI was very concerned that members of the constitutional militia movement might come to their aid.
They approached the leadership of these formations, trying to determine what our intentions were should the situation "go south," turning into another Waco. As part of this effort, the FBI Special Agent in Charge of the Albuquerque New Mexico office journeyed downstate to visit Bob Wright, than (as now) commander of the 1st Brigade, New Mexico Militia. "Bob," he asked, "would you really take your unit up to Montana to protect them?"
Bob looked him in the eye and said, "Why would I want to do that? There's plenty of you federal sonsabitches around here."
Our point was, then as it is now, that as much as we disagreed with the people in the compound, we believed that the Federal government had an absolute duty to respect their due process rights and to do what was necessary to end the situation without killing them. Bob's rejoinder made it clear that if it did turn into another Waco, that there would be a NATIONAL response and that we would fight in our own areas of operation where we were strongest. What Bob was trying to communicate was that we were prisoners of our own principles. We had sworn after the immolation of the Davidians that there would be "no more free Wacos." That if the Feds began killing citizens without legal recourse that they would pay a price in blood for it. Indeed, if there is one principle that everyone in the liberty movement, such as it is, agrees upon it is that. Since then, we have sent that message in a number of ways including "No More Free Wacos: An Explication of the Obvious Addressed to Eric Holder, Attorney General of the United States" in 2009. I also made this a central tenet of the Three Percent Catechism.
Among the other principles is no first use of force. We call this, "No Fort Sumters." To do so would be to surrender the moral high ground. The Founders understood that. Indeed, even the people who responded to the righteous cause of the Bundys at the time of the standoff there understood it. Yet now we have a situation contrived by some of the same people who first showed their true colors in the aftermath of that confrontation throwing this crucial tenet into the garbage can. I refer the reader to my article of yesterday, "Perfect timing for the regime. Federal provocateurs, sociopaths and idiots with a John Brown complex are writing checks that they expect the rest of us to cash in our blood," and to the statement of the Oregon Three Percent organization whose march was exploited by Ammon Bundy and his supporters to achieve the takeover.
I hasten to add that this tactic is straight out of the communist provocateur's handbook. I know since as a former member of the Maoist Progressive Labor Party, we used to do the same thing to peaceful anti-war marches. Like wise, today's black flag street "anarchists" do the same thing all across the world. The point of the tactic is to take the violence up several notches, goad the government forces into responding and radicalize others who are subsequently beaten and tear gassed. It is a tactic older than Karl Marx.
And yet, as wrong-headed and suspect as are the actions and the motives of the few people who are currently holed up in the Fish and Wildlife Service office (and they are far fewer than is claimed), the rest of us are still prisoners of our own enunciated principles. Bundy and the others (including several people whom are widely suspected of being federal provocateurs) have indeed written a check that they expect the rest of us to cash in our own blood in a ghastly civil war. Yet we cannot allow the federal government to take advantage of this perfect propaganda opportunity that they have apparently spent such effort contriving and use deadly force on the occupiers without response. As at the time of the Freemen standoff, we must get across the message to the Feds that if they do so, there will be a national response in those local areas of operations where we are strongest, politically and militarily. Frankly, this is a plea for any adults in the room in DC to intervene and use caution before this blows up in all of our faces.
As to the personalities involved, I can say this from personal experience on the ground at the time of the original Bundy confrontation. The sociopathic weasel (and likely fed provocateur) Ryan Payne insinuated himself into the Bundy family by going to church with them and promising to convert to their brand of the LDS church. Whether he actually did or not is unknown to me, but I was told by Bundy himself that this was the reason that they trusted him and took him into their personal defense detail, much as Cleopatra clasped the asp to her own bosom.
In addition, I am informed by someone on the ground out there that Ammon Bundy believes that it is his mission "to make the refuge into some sort of New Jerusalem." The parallels between Ammon and John Brown grow creepier by the minute. Others apparently view this as an opportunity for "suicide by Fed," acting out whatever private demons they have pursuing them.
Boil all of this down and this is what we have left as our own demands, our own declaration, if you will:
1. Put the Feds on notice that as much as we disagree with the actions of these people, that the government has an absolute duty to see that the situation ends without violence. In the case of the Freemen, that took 81 days and involved outside negotiators (at least one of whom, Kirk Lyons, was a federal informant).
2. We must get across to the Feds that if they do not end this peacefully, if they go for a dynamic raid that gets people killed, that they will start a national conflagration that will be fought using the principles of Fourth Generation Warfare as adapted to an American civil war. War makers and decision takers, and not just SRT thugs, will put their own lives on the line in any conflict they start. No more free Wacos. Period.
3. We must insist that some outside negotiators try to work out a compromise between the occupiers and the authorities to facilitate a peaceful end to the standoff. (Of course this time it would be preferable if none of those negotiators was a federal snitch.)
4. We must declare that the Founders always looked upon the armed citizenry as the ultimate guarantors of liberty and safety and that by making these demands we are entirely consistent with their vision of a constitutional republic of limited powers and the rule of law.
We are prisoners of our principles, as originally enunciated by them. As much as we disagree with the occupiers and whatever motives they have, we cannot do otherwise. No more free Wacos.
(If you agree with this declaration, kindly pass it on.)
Mike Vanderboegh, PO Box 926, Pinson AL 35126
Founder, National Three Percent movement.
Addendum: If I didn't make this clear in the above, let me make it plain. If you want to support the principle that Bundy and his followers are entitled to due process of law and to survive this confrontation of their own making, DO NOT ANSWER THE SIREN CALL AND GO THERE. Rather, get ready to fight in your own AOs, where you are strongest. If the occupiers are successful in their yearning for suicide by fed, the fight will in very short order come to you, as it will come to us all. Get ready. And do not neglect using every political lever open to influence everyone from the local sheriff and town councilmen to your congresscritters to exert every pressure on the regime to negotiate a peaceful end to this insanity.
-
Not even sure why people are bringing up sexual orientation. Lots of us white guys are gay (no homo) and they tend to do very well financially.
-
Not even sure why people are bringing up sexual orientation. Lots of us white guys are gay (no homo) and they tend to do very well financially.
Ask Tom... He brought it up.
And finally changing demographics. White heterosexual males have been the majority for all of this country's history, but that is changing. Already changed in places like California. White militia types are scared as shit of that.
I didn't see the point he was making either, which is why I inquired as to a clarification.
-
Whose building is it? It's a federal building meaning it belongs to "the people". These men are "the people" and they are addressing grievances against the government.
They want to gain a larger market share of the cattle industry.
They want to use govt lands to gain a competitive advantage.
Even if they *could* use it because they paid for it, the biggest issue is now they're no longer letting OTHERS use it.
The took over a federal building. They refuse to let others come close. They said they'll kill people. They're not just using their share, they're taking it all. OTHER taxpayers can't use it now either, people who work there are deprived of it.
-
They want to gain a larger market share of the cattle industry.
They want to use govt lands to gain a competitive advantage.
Even if they *could* use it because they paid for it, the biggest issue is now they're no longer letting OTHERS use it.
The took over a federal building. They refuse to let others come close. They said they'll kill people. They're not just using their share, they're taking it all. OTHER taxpayers can't use it now either, people who work there are deprived of it.
-
They want to gain a larger market share of the cattle industry.
They want to use govt lands to gain a competitive advantage.
Even if they *could* use it because they paid for it, the biggest issue is now they're no longer letting OTHERS use it.
The took over a federal building. They refuse to let others come close. They said they'll kill people. They're not just using their share, they're taking it all. OTHER taxpayers can't use it now either, people who work there are deprived of it.
Yep get that narrative out there, so when .gov goes in hot, it will all look justified.
-
Yep get that narrative out there, so when .gov goes in hot, it will all look justified.
Serious question to you Kazan.
Do you feel they are justified in their actions?
While I believe in freedoms, if someone is found guilty of a crime, should people be allowed to intercede on their behalf to keep them from dealing with punishment?
-
Ask Tom... He brought it up.
Please, call me Tim
I didn't see the point he was making either, which is why I inquired as to a clarification.
From where I sit, the radical right seems to be mostly older white christian heterosexual males. They seem to fear "others" the most. Their numbers are dwindling because 1) they're old and dying off, and 2) everyone else is becoming more populace.
the original point of this thread was to point out the hypocrisy of the news coverage and of the way the authorities are dealing with it. If the group that had occupied the federal building with their assault weapons been anyone other than white heterosexual males, it would be on cable news non stop, and the authorities would have stormed the building already.
Let me throw out this definition of White Privilege: Being pulled over by a traffic cop and not fearing that you will be harassed, injured, or killed. Even though I'm white and male, that I'm not heterosexual, from past experiences, I don't trust the police. I understand the BLM movement well.
White Privilege is taking over a government building with assault rifles and surviving to see the next day.
-
Yep get that narrative out there, so when .gov goes in hot, it will all look justified.
Based on what happened at the Bundy ranch two years ago, you really think .gov will not just simply wait them out?
Wait them out is the correct response. Too bad police won't do that with non whites.
-
Imagine if blacks had the means and balls to do something like this. Fighter jets would have been scrambled.
-
Serious question to you Kazan.
Do you feel they are justified in their actions?
While I believe in freedoms, if someone is found guilty of a crime, should people be allowed to intercede on their behalf to keep them from dealing with punishment?
Double jeopardy is an actual thing in jurisprudence. Citizens should be free and ENCOURAGED to resist anti-Constitutional actions made by their government. It's the whole fucking point of the second amendment.
-
Imagine if blacks had the means and balls to do something like this. Fighter jets would have been scrambled.
Utter bulkshit.
-
Please, call me Tim
From where I sit, the radical right seems to be mostly older white christian heterosexual males. They seem to fear "others" the most. Their numbers are dwindling because 1) they're old and dying off, and 2) everyone else is becoming more populace.
the original point of this thread was to point out the hypocrisy of the news coverage and of the way the authorities are dealing with it. If the group that had occupied the federal building with their assault weapons been anyone other than white heterosexual males, it would be on cable news non stop, and the authorities would have stormed the building already.
Let me throw out this definition of White Privilege: Being pulled over by a traffic cop and not fearing that you will be harassed, injured, or killed. Even though I'm white and male, that I'm not heterosexual, from past experiences, I don't trust the police. I understand the BLM movement well.
My apologies Tim,
Are you claiming that if you are pulled over at a traffic stop that you fear for your life because the police can tell you are gay?
You will have to excuse me if I don't exactly buy what you're selling there.
The BLM groups would laugh in your face for saying that.
Double jeopardy is an actual thing in jurisprudence. Citizens should be free and ENCOURAGED to resist anti-Constitutional actions made by their government. It's the whole fucking point of the second amendment.
I don't believe this is a double jeopardy situation. The Judge handed down a sentence that he could not legally do. I do believe this is a problem, but there are minimum sentences (I don't agree with minimum sentences personally) and they legally should have to serve the full 5 years.
No one seemed to do this over minimum sentences for drug possessions and what not.
Now, while I don't agree with these minimum sentence statutes, that is not the same as "Double Jeopardy". These people are not being tried for the same crime twice. They are being forced to complete the minimum sentence that the law requires.
-
Are you claiming that if you are pulled over at a traffic stop that you fear for your life because the police can tell you are gay?
My interaction with police since I came out in 1982 have convinced me that police are not to be trusted. and I'd say that most gay guys, certainly those over a certain age, would say the same thing. BLM groups understand that perfectly.
-
Please, call me Tim
From where I sit, the radical right seems to be mostly older white christian heterosexual males. They seem to fear "others" the most. Their numbers are dwindling because 1) they're old and dying off, and 2) everyone else is becoming more populace.
the original point of this thread was to point out the hypocrisy of the news coverage and of the way the authorities are dealing with it. If the group that had occupied the federal building with their assault weapons been anyone other than white heterosexual males, it would be on cable news non stop, and the authorities would have stormed the building already.
Let me throw out this definition of White Privilege: Being pulled over by a traffic cop and not fearing that you will be harassed, injured, or killed. Even though I'm white and male, that I'm not heterosexual, from past experiences, I don't trust the police. I understand the BLM movement well.
White Privilege is taking over a government building with assault rifles and surviving to see the next day.
is this " Black Privilege " in action? Armed with " assault rifles " in front of a police station and not a single one of them gunned down. ::)
Let me throw out this definition of White Privilege: Being pulled over by a traffic cop and not fearing that you will be harassed, injured, or killed.
My " White privilege " didn't save me when a white cop pulled me over , mistook my sun glasses for a gun and pointed his firearm at my head while screaming for me to get out of the car. Oh and it didn't save me when a Massachusetts State trooper threatened to kill me.
-
Serious question to you Kazan.
Do you feel they are justified in their actions?
While I believe in freedoms, if someone is found guilty of a crime, should people be allowed to intercede on their behalf to keep them from dealing with punishment?
Yes, the individuals at the root of all this were arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced, served their time and were released - as per the law.
It's .gov that decided to haul them back in and make them serve more time.
-
a group of "terrorists" according Harry Reid, armed to the teeth, holed up in a gubment building.
http://www.reviewjournal.com/politics/reid-calls-bundy-supporters-domestic-terrorists
they're upset because two of their colleagues were actually convicted of terrorism and they don't want them incarcerated.
http://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/eastern-oregon-ranchers-convicted-arson-resentenced-five-years-prison
nobody is reporting it as terror though?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/03/why-arent-we-calling-the-oregon-militia-terrorists/
???
looking forward to the FBI statement on this matter.
I expect swift action will be taken against this threat!
(https://lintvkoin.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/ammon-bundy-militia-a-01032016.jpg?w=640)
-
My interaction with police since I came out in 1982 have convinced me that police are not to be trusted. and I'd say that most gay guys, certainly those over a certain age, would say the same thing. BLM groups understand that perfectly.
So again, I ask you.
Can a cop tell you are gay when you are being pulled over or stopped for some reason?
Do you believe that it equates to being instantly identified as black?
-
My " White privilege " didn't save me when a white cop pulled me over , mistook my sun glasses for a gun and pointed his firearm at my head while screaming for me to get out of the car. Oh and it didn't save me when a Massachusetts State trooper threatened to kill me.
you lived to tell about it.
Sandra Bland was pulled over for a traffic stop (one that the car video showed to be completely bogus), arrested when she should have only gotten a citation, and ended up dead in the jail cell. The Grand Jury declined to indict.
-
Yes, the individuals at the root of all this were arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced, served their time and were released - as per the law.
It's .gov that decided to haul them back in and make them serve more time.
But they didn't.
They were convicted of terrorism and there is a minimum time of 5 years which they did not serve.
The Judge did not have ability to give them a lighter sentence due to guidelines and requirements. So this was not done "as per the law".
-
Do you believe that it equates to being instantly identified as black?
No, I can blend in, so my life is not in danger as much as other minorities.
But even white women get harassed by police, so I'm sure some feel trepidation when being pulled over.
And it is not just white police officers, but all. The War On Terror™ has turned all police into paramilitary groups. They think they're in the Marine Corp with the Us vs Them feeling cranked up even more. They no longer know how to deescalate a situation. God help you if you ever feel the need to call the police for a family member with mental health issues, especially if you're not white.
-
But they didn't.
They were convicted of terrorism and there is a minimum time of 5 years which they did not serve.
The Judge did not have ability to give them a lighter sentence due to guidelines and requirements. So this was not done "as per the law".
Well then the sentence should have been contested at the time, not a year and half later. That is bullshit and equivalent to double jeopardy. I like how .gov starts charging people with terrorism, that is a very subjective term.
-
No, I can blend in, so my life is not in danger as much as other minorities.
But even white women get harassed by police, so I'm sure some feel trepidation when being pulled over.
And it is not just white police officers, but all. The War On Terror™ has turned all police into paramilitary groups. They think they're in the Marine Corp with the Us vs Them feeling cranked up even more. They no longer know how to deescalate a situation. God help you if you ever feel the need to call the police for a family member with mental health issues, especially if you're not white.
Understand, I'm not protecting police officers that do bad things.
I am just specifically saying that I don't think the police equate being gay in the same way the police equate being black, especially in regards to someone being able to immediately determine a reason to be bigoted towards them.
-
you lived to tell about it.
Sandra Bland was pulled over for a traffic stop (one that the car video showed to be completely bogus), arrested when she should have only gotten a citation, and ended up dead in the jail cell. The Grand Jury declined to indict.
you lived to tell about it.
Irrelevant " white privilege " should have prevented me from even getting pulled over in the first place. ::) Again your claim Let me throw out this definition of White Privilege: Being pulled over by a traffic cop and not fearing that you will be harassed, injured, or killed
Sandra Bland was pulled over for a traffic stop (one that the car video showed to be completely bogus), arrested when she should have only gotten a citation, and ended up dead in the jail cell. The Grand Jury declined to indict.
Yes the conspiracy ::) She got pulled over maybe it was bogus or not , she decided where that interaction went , if she just shut her mouth she could have driven off with just a ticket. The cop was a complete dick for sure but she wanted to test him , she got what she wanted. And I love how you imply she ' ended up dead in the jail cell " NO , Tim , She KILLED herself in the jail cell. Recall all the conspiracy theories? She was dead already when they took her mug shot? They " killed " her? There was no footage of her alive? ::)
I've encountered some MAJOR asshole cops and some cool ones. These matters aren't as black & white as people paint them out to be.
-
On Sunday, Sheriff Ward issued a longer statement that said, in part:
“These men came to Harney County claiming to be part of militia groups supporting local ranchers, when in reality these men had alternative motives to attempt to over throw the county and federal government in hopes to spark a movement across the United States.
“We are currently working jointly with several organizations to make sure the citizens of Harney County are safe and this issue is resolved as quickly and peaceful as possible. At this time we do not have any information that any other areas in Harney County are in immediate danger.
“We ask that people stay away from the refuge for their safety. We also ask that if anyone sees any of these individuals in the area to please contact law enforcement and do not confront the individuals themselves. …”
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-ff-militia-oregon-20160103-story.html
:o
-
you lived to tell about it.
Sandra Bland was pulled over for a traffic stop (one that the car video showed to be completely bogus), arrested when she should have only gotten a citation, and ended up dead in the jail cell. The Grand Jury declined to indict.
Not an accurate description of what occurred.
Did Ms. Bland or her family post bail so she wouldn't be held in jail?
Not a very good example. She brought about her charges and arrest, she resisted, she was charged, her family wanted nothing to do with her because she was psychotic, and then she killed herself.
-
11 pages?
-
11 pages?
the ghey has gotten strong on getbig
-
11 pages?
Kinda funny isn't it, hell there are threads all over the place about the "police state", then when people stand up to .gov, they are attacked.
-
So again, I ask you.
Can a cop tell you are gay when you are being pulled over or stopped for some reason?
Do you believe that it equates to being instantly identified as black?
I'm with you, I don't see gays needing to be fearful of the police. In the first place, unless you are a major flamer, how would the police even know you are gay? Even as there were more issues with gays regarding police, it would have to be so small and minuscule compared to what blacks endure. Maybe Tim is just the type of far left leaning liberal that gets enjoyment out of being a victim. Or perhaps it's different where he lives, Australia I think?
-
you lived to tell about it.
Sandra Bland was pulled over for a traffic stop (one that the car video showed to be completely bogus), arrested when she should have only gotten a citation, and ended up dead in the jail cell. The Grand Jury declined to indict.
Nobody is buying your bullshit lies, tom. Go be "bearded white liberal 45 year old man who plays with kittens" and leave us be.
-
Kinda funny isn't it, hell there are threads all over the place about the "police state", then when people stand up to .gov, they are attacked.
Who is being attacked?
-
Kinda funny isn't it, hell there are threads all over the place about the "police state", then when people stand up to .gov, they are attacked.
This!
-
good point.
If you punch a cop, you deserve to be shot in the head. Cool.
BUT if you and 50 friends decide to take over a public building with rifles and promise to murder... well, it's cool, you're a patriot.
-
good point.
If you punch a cop, you deserve to be shot in the head. Cool.
BUT if you and 50 friends decide to take over a public building with rifles and promise to murder... well, it's cool, you're a patriot.
:D
-
good point.
If you punch a cop, you deserve to be shot in the head. Cool.
BUT if you and 50 friends decide to take over a public building with rifles and promise to murder... well, it's cool, you're a patriot.
You just type whatever pops into your head with no proof to back it up, good thing you aren't out there with you shit trigger discipline, you would have either shot someone or blown your own foot off.
-
on this thread, on getbig...
at some point, the people defending them are just going to get quiet, stop posting. Happens a lot.
The more we hear about these dudes... what they're protesting (2 dudes found guilty of TERRORISM?) and the more we hear about their threats of violence, the LESS we're going to have people calling them patriots.
I bet Glen Beck is cautiously quiet on this, Rush is classically over-reactive, and Hannity just wants to blame Obama/Reid for the entire situation ;)
-
You just type whatever pops into your head with no proof to back it up, good thing you aren't out there with you shit trigger discipline, you would have either shot someone or blown your own foot off.
;D
Anyone take this clown seriously? The Feds would label him a " domestic terrorist " if they saw this pic lmao
-
You just type whatever pops into your head with no proof to back it up, good thing you aren't out there with you shit trigger discipline, you would have either shot someone or blown your own foot off.
I know you are an anti-government advocate and I have to give you credit because even though I have often disagreed with you, you;ve been pretty steady with your beliefs....BUT...it seems you are arguing for armed insurrection against the government in the guise of resistance against government "oppression"
I don't see the oppression on their parts
-
on this thread, on getbig...
at some point, the people defending them are just going to get quiet, stop posting. Happens a lot.
The more we hear about these dudes... what they're protesting (2 dudes found guilty of TERRORISM?) and the more we hear about their threats of violence, the LESS we're going to have people calling them patriots.
I bet Glen Beck is cautiously quiet on this, Rush is classically over-reactive, and Hannity just wants to blame Obama/Reid for the entire situation ;)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gop-candidates-stay-quiet-on-oregon-standoff/2016/01/03/b8b9806c-b239-11e5-9388-466021d971de_story.html
:D
-
You just type whatever pops into your head with no proof to back it up, good thing you aren't out there with you shit trigger discipline, you would have either shot someone or blown your own foot off.
we've all just seen you move from discussing the TOPIC, to a spot where you're insulting the MESSENGER.
happens on the political board all the time when people have no good response or argument, they just talk shit about the person making the post.
-
I know you are an anti-government advocate and I have to give you credit because even though I have often disagreed with you, you;ve been pretty steady with your beliefs....BUT...it seems you are arguing for armed insurrection against the government in the guise of resistance against government "oppression"
I don't see the oppression on their parts
If you're black how can you not see any oppression on their parts? ??? The American government has always been shady and always be , thus is nature. Be very wary of any person that wants to control other people , who spends $100 million dollars a year for a job that pays $500K?
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gop-candidates-stay-quiet-on-oregon-standoff/2016/01/03/b8b9806c-b239-11e5-9388-466021d971de_story.html
:D
LMAO - repub candidates SILENT on this because whoever gets the votes of those who support white bald dudes doing armed insurrection, will win the nomination too.
-
on this thread, on getbig...
at some point, the people defending them are just going to get quiet, stop posting. Happens a lot.
The more we hear about these dudes... what they're protesting (2 dudes found guilty of TERRORISM?) and the more we hear about their threats of violence, the LESS we're going to have people calling them patriots.
I bet Glen Beck is cautiously quiet on this, Rush is classically over-reactive, and Hannity just wants to blame Obama/Reid for the entire situation ;)
Yeah charged with terrorism, why? Why all of a sudden is .gov charging people with terrorism for the following?
1) a controlled burn on the Hammond property that spilled over onto 130ish acres of federal land before the Hammond's put it out. No firefighters responded
2) a backburn started by the Hammond's to protect their property and home from fires started by lighting strikes during a storm in 2006
-
I don't see the oppression on their parts
they're pissed at the justice system? LOL
They're pissed they can't use govt lands to feed their cattle, it's as simple as that. So threatening to murder people is their solution. for fucks sake, they threatened to kill people - there is no defending this group now. If they were peaceful, that's one thing. They kicked everyone out and threatened to spill US blood unless political prisoners were released, thus allowing them to make more money from cattle.
In 2 days, NOBODY will be defending this group. Kazan, you've moved to shitting on 240 and not defending them, so I think all realize you have no points left.
-
LMAO - repub candidates SILENT on this because whoever gets the votes of those who support white bald dudes doing armed insurrection, will win the nomination too.
Most people wait for the facts to be revealed before taking a position. Most people.
Have fun with whatever it is you're doing, kid. ;D
-
Yeah charged with terrorism, why? Why all of a sudden is .gov charging people with terrorism for the following?
1) a controlled burn on the Hammond property that spilled over onto 130ish acres of federal land before the Hammond's put it out. No firefighters responded
2) a backburn started by the Hammond's to protect their property and home from fires started by lighting strikes during a storm in 2006
"Spilled over'? LOL Suppose I "start" a bonfire in my yard and it "spills over" into the next yard and kills the sleeping family/ Guess what... I'm going to prison.
Whether they burned the lands to hurt the govt, or it was "accidental"... the RESULT of their ACTIONS was destroyed US govt property... you go to prison when you do that.
i can't believe anyone is defending them. They're starving for viable lands, so they burn theirs right next to the govt's and say "oops" right after govt refuses to let them use the land. Yeah, starting massive fires to gain a political gain... that's terrorism. Fire kills just like bullets.
-
Yeah charged with terrorism, why? Why all of a sudden is .gov charging people with terrorism for the following?
1) a controlled burn on the Hammond property that spilled over onto 130ish acres of federal land before the Hammond's put it out. No firefighters responded
2) a backburn started by the Hammond's to protect their property and home from fires started by lighting strikes during a storm in 2006
Shouldn't you be asking why a jury found them guilty?
-
we've all just seen you move from discussing the TOPIC, to a spot where you're insulting the MESSENGER.
happens on the political board all the time when people have no good response or argument, they just talk shit about the person making the post.
I am discussing the topic, you are all over the road with BLM, Muslims and whatever non sequitur subject you can toss into the thread. You are like one of those asshats that create all those meme's to illicit an emotional response, no matter how devoid of fact it is.
-
Shouldn't you be asking why a jury found them guilty?
They were found guilty, sentenced, and server the sentence. What I want to know is why they were charged with terrorism.
-
Oregon, ranchers set to report to prison on Monday for lighting fires in 2001 and 2006 that they said reduced the growth of invasive plants and protected their land from wildfire. Both Dwight Hammond Jr., 73, and Steven Hammond, 46, were convicted three years ago, with the father serving three months and the son a year.
I suspect that the feds figured they could hit them harder with terror charges...plus this makes it seem that right wing terror is on the raise so some shit....
-
They were found guilty, sentenced, and server the sentence. What I want to know is why they were charged with terrorism.
I do not know this, and the more I read it, the more I am finding that there is no definitive proof that they were actually charged WITH terrorism.
If they were NOT, then the judge acted appropriately, and I'm inclined to start siding with the premise of double jeopardy in this instance.
I'm still researching, but I will keep looking and let you know what I find.
-
LMAO - repub candidates SILENT on this because whoever gets the votes of those who support white bald dudes doing armed insurrection, will win the nomination too.
I hear the cops have actually asked them to stay quiet for fear they may inflame the situation with reckless comments.
which i think is normal for anti terror operations
:D
-
http://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/eastern-oregon-ranchers-convicted-arson-resentenced-five-years-prison
The jury convicted both of the Hammonds of using fire to destroy federal property for a 2001 arson known as the Hardie-Hammond Fire, located in the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area. Witnesses at trial, including a relative of the Hammonds, testified the arson occurred shortly after Steven Hammond and his hunting party illegally slaughtered several deer on BLM property. Jurors were told that Steven Hammond handed out “Strike Anywhere” matches with instructions that they be lit and dropped on the ground because they were going to “light up the whole country on fire.” One witness testified that he barely escaped the eight to ten foot high flames caused by the arson. The fire consumed 139 acres of public land and destroyed all evidence of the game violations. After committing the arson, Steven Hammond called the BLM office in Burns, Oregon and claimed the fire was started on Hammond property to burn off invasive species and had inadvertently burned onto public lands. Dwight and Steven Hammond told one of their relatives to keep his mouth shut and that nobody needed to know about the fire.
....
By law, arson on federal land carries a five-year mandatory minimum sentence. When the Hammonds were originally sentenced, they argued that the five-year mandatory minimum terms were unconstitutional and the trial court agreed and imposed sentences well below what the law required based upon the jury’s verdicts. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, however, upheld the federal law, reasoning that “given the seriousness of arson, a five-year sentence is not grossly disproportionate to the offense.” The court vacated the original, unlawful sentences and ordered that the Hammonds be resentenced “in compliance with the law.” In March 2015, the Supreme Court rejected the Hammonds’ petitions for certiorari. Today, Chief Judge Aiken imposed five year prison terms on each of the Hammonds, with credit for time they already served.
-
Found on FoxNews.
"Federal lawyers prosecuted the Hammonds under an anti-terrorism law that required a five-year minimum sentence, though they have declined to say why"
Nothing specific, but I guess they were in fact charged with some anti-terrorism law and they were found guilty.
-
Oregon, ranchers set to report to prison on Monday for lighting fires in 2001 and 2006 that they said reduced the growth of invasive plants and protected their land from wildfire. Both Dwight Hammond Jr., 73, and Steven Hammond, 46, were convicted three years ago, with the father serving three months and the son a year.
I suspect that the feds figured they could hit them harder with terror charges...plus this makes it seem that right wing terror is on the raise so some shit....
Doesn't bode well does it? Gov can just arbitrarily label you a terrorist and lock you away for 5 years.
-
Doesn't bode well does it? Gov can just arbitrarily label you a terrorist and lock you away for 5 years.
I argued against this sort of thing during the Jose Padilla mess. They didn't even charge him and lock him away... Tossed him into Guantanamo like it was nothing.
They may have labeled them terrorists, but again, they had a trial and were found guilty right? That's not "arbitrary and they aren't just locking someone way."
They had due process.
A jury must have convicted them. The Judge didn't like the minimum sentence. Minimum sentences are bullshit, but they have been the law of the land for awhile.
-
The version with the intro of trumpets is better:
Honestly, I prefer the Black Panther version
-
they're not denying it
???
:o
-
I argued against this sort of thing during the Jose Padilla mess. They didn't even charge him and lock him away... Tossed him into Guantanamo like it was nothing.
They may have labeled them terrorists, but again, they had a trial and were found guilty right?
A jury must have convicted them. The Judge didn't like the minimum sentence. Minimum sentences are bullshit, but they have been the law of the land for awhile.
True, an American citizen should not be disappeared without due process. Gov is stacking the deck in their favor, label someone a terrorist, or racist or whatever else they can come up with, and you are automatically a pariah. Doesn't take much to turn public opinion, and very few care to actually read past the headlines.
-
http://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/eastern-oregon-ranchers-convicted-arson-resentenced-five-years-prison
The jury convicted both of the Hammonds of using fire to destroy federal property for a 2001 arson known as the Hardie-Hammond Fire, located in the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area. Witnesses at trial, including a relative of the Hammonds, testified the arson occurred shortly after Steven Hammond and his hunting party illegally slaughtered several deer on BLM property. Jurors were told that Steven Hammond handed out “Strike Anywhere” matches with instructions that they be lit and dropped on the ground because they were going to “light up the whole country on fire.” One witness testified that he barely escaped the eight to ten foot high flames caused by the arson. The fire consumed 139 acres of public land and destroyed all evidence of the game violations. After committing the arson, Steven Hammond called the BLM office in Burns, Oregon and claimed the fire was started on Hammond property to burn off invasive species and had inadvertently burned onto public lands. Dwight and Steven Hammond told one of their relatives to keep his mouth shut and that nobody needed to know about the fire.
....
By law, arson on federal land carries a five-year mandatory minimum sentence. When the Hammonds were originally sentenced, they argued that the five-year mandatory minimum terms were unconstitutional and the trial court agreed and imposed sentences well below what the law required based upon the jury’s verdicts. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, however, upheld the federal law, reasoning that “given the seriousness of arson, a five-year sentence is not grossly disproportionate to the offense.” The court vacated the original, unlawful sentences and ordered that the Hammonds be resentenced “in compliance with the law.” In March 2015, the Supreme Court rejected the Hammonds’ petitions for certiorari. Today, Chief Judge Aiken imposed five year prison terms on each of the Hammonds, with credit for time they already served.
WOW.... they very clearly INTENTIONALLY started multiple fires on US govt lands...
and they're out in less than 5 years, and they're still upset?
they got off easy. and with that much witness testimony, there's no denying their guilt.
-
WOW.... they very clearly INTENTIONALLY started multiple fires on US govt lands...
and they're out in less than 5 years, and they're still upset?
they got off easy. and with that much witness testimony, there's no denying their guilt.
To be fair, they are being told to go back to serve the full term, however I would guess that they would be eligible for parole / good time / whatever and would be out in another year or so after serving only a bit more.
-
To be fair, they are being told to go back to serve the full term, however I would guess that they would be eligible for parole / good time / whatever and would be out in another year or so after serving only a bit more.
these militants are SO in need of a 'cause', they chose a couple of arsonists who were forced to serve their full term, and decided to hitch their cart to them.
Just as the getbiggers who loved on "these carefree rebels" earlier today are realizing they're just corporate trolls and gun nuts dying to destory the govt whose lands they've been using to profit for years.
burning lands because the govt won't let you use them for feeding cattle in your PRIVATE comapny? They deserved way more than 5 years for that. IMAGINE if I'm pissed the govt won't provide free cheese for my burger joint, so I burn down the cheese factory. GTFO...
-
You guys realize that the guys going back to jail are not the ones in the gov building and have even disassociated themselves from those people right?
-
You guys realize that the guys going back to jail are not the ones in the gov building and have even disassociated themselves from those people right?
Yes, it was stated a few pages back. I believe the guys who went to jail were saying they are not a part of this and are not advocating for it.
-
You guys realize that the guys going back to jail are not the ones in the gov building and have even disassociated themselves from those people right?
yeah, they're doing their time. They killed a TON of wildlife... a whole herd of deer, I think? they did serious damage and just want to do their time.
These folks just want to use govt lands to feed their cattle... they're using this flimsy excuse to start a war. They want to be martyrs, always begging for a sword to fall on.
personally, I can't see starting a cattle company unless you have the land to feed them. Don't complain because you can't get a govt freebie to use those lands. And don't use these Hammonds when they want nothing to do with these guys.
-
You guys realize that the guys going back to jail are not the ones in the gov building and have even disassociated themselves from those people right?
Correct.
These people in this building are completely unrelated and are simply using the Hammonds as an excuse.
-
Yes, it was stated a few pages back. I believe the guys who went to jail were saying they are not a part of this and are not advocating for it.
Not interested in 240's what ifs and politcal speculation bullshit, did anyone find out why these guys are holed up in this building?
-
Not interested in 240's what ifs and politcal speculation bullshit, did anyone find out why these guys are holed up in this building?
Dont know. Ive been too busy asking women about Shizzo vs. Helmut. ;D ;D
-
Here is a long article on the background of this. Take from it what you will.........
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/03/full-story-on-whats-going-on-in-oregon-militia-take-over-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge-in-protest-to-hammond-family-persecution/ (http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/03/full-story-on-whats-going-on-in-oregon-militia-take-over-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge-in-protest-to-hammond-family-persecution/)
-
according to the local sheriff they're trying to spark a movement to overthrow the federal govenment
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-ff-militia-oregon-20160103-story.html
-
AJ outing his Kazan gimmick in this thread.
-
according to the local sheriff they're trying to spark a movement to overthrow the federal govenment
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-ff-militia-oregon-20160103-story.html
From a field in bumfuck Oregon? Nice! 8)
-
AJ outing his Kazan gimmick in this thread.
(http://www.cliparthut.com/clip-arts/66/drunk-driving-cartoons-66483.jpg)
-
From a field in bumfuck Oregon? Nice! 8)
I think 240 has the right idea personally.
Makes more sense if they're trying to free up all that federally owned land for private use. $$$!
-
AJ outing his Kazan gimmick in this thread.
I wish. He's doing better than I would. Please, carry on!
-
I think 240 has the right idea personally.
Makes more sense if they're trying to free up all that federally owned land for private use. $$$!
a lot of people will wrap themselves in the flag when trying to push for a cause. we're supposed to believe these 40 to 60 dudes are willing to die for... um.. a couple of very-guilty arsonists?
it usually comes down to money. these dudes want to use federal lands so they can make a monster profit.
-
cnn interviewing the armed militants ("terrorists") attempting to overthrow the US government.
???
-
Farmers often do controlled burns to prep/clear land
witnesses and forensics proved over and over they were intentional, revenge fires.
-
This obviously is inviting a massive over-reaction by the Feds
a group of people with guns is threatening to overthrow the govt.
they've taken control of a govt building and are using media to spread their "rise up" message, as the video above shows.
What should be the appropriate reaction on the part of the govt?
-
No not when ever they feel like it, read the 1st amendment again: or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
I think you may be mistaken about them being there to peaceably assemble.
Did you see the video above? They plan overthrow of the govt.
Armed men. Blocked off the road. Broke into a govt building. Chasing everyone off. Got on CNN and promised to murder anyone that came close. Got on CNN and said they want to overthrow the govt.
What's peaceful about that?
-
cnn interviewing the armed militants ("terrorists") attempting to overthrow the US government.
???
I seemed to have missed the whole overthrowing the gov part that you and douche40 are harping on. Link?
-
I seemed to have missed the whole overthrowing the gov part that you and douche40 are harping on. Link?
These men came to Harney County claiming to be part of militia groups supporting local ranchers, when in reality these men had alternative motives, to attempt to overthrow the county and federal government in hopes to spark a movement across the United States," Ward said in a statement Sunday.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-ff-militia-oregon-20160103-story.html
-
These men came to Harney County claiming to be part of militia groups supporting local ranchers, when in reality these men had alternative motives, to attempt to overthrow the county and federal government in hopes to spark a movement across the United States," Ward said in a statement Sunday.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-ff-militia-oregon-20160103-story.html
Is that the sheriffs opinion, can he back up his statement or just wild speculation from a backwoods sheriff?
-
a group of adults clearly carrying real guns with presumably live ammunition take hold of government property (reportedly in support of a group of recently convicted arsonists) allow themselves to be interviewed by TV and other media while resisting removal by government forces (who seemingly facilitate such interviews even when claiming the offending occupants are terrorists.
So far nobody has been injured let alone killed
There is a perversity in a society that practices such forbearance yet was not able to afford any degree of patience to a 12 year old child playing with a toy gun by himself in a playground
-
Having guns with presumably live ammo is a moot point. This is the United states and that is completely legal and one of our constitutional rights.
-
Is that the sheriffs opinion, can he back up his statement or just wild speculation from a backwoods sheriff?
this is the only statement made by any law enforcement so it's all we have.
If you look at the video of the marine, he starts out by saying his goodbyes to his wife and kids. Then he goes on a long rant about government tyranny. These guys are fanatics.
[/youtube]
-
a group of adults clearly carrying real guns with presumably live ammunition take hold of government property (reportedly in support of a group of recently convicted arsonists) allow themselves to be interviewed by TV and other media while resisting removal by government forces (who seemingly facilitate such interviews even when claiming the offending occupants are terrorists.
So far nobody has been injured let alone killed
There is a perversity in a society that practices such forbearance yet was not able to afford any degree of patience to a 12 year old child playing with a toy gun by himself in a playground
This is a very good point.
-
a group of adults clearly carrying real guns with presumably live ammunition take hold of government property (reportedly in support of a group of recently convicted arsonists) allow themselves to be interviewed by TV and other media while resisting removal by government forces (who seemingly facilitate such interviews even when claiming the offending occupants are terrorists.
So far nobody has been injured let alone killed
There is a perversity in a society that practices such forbearance yet was not able to afford any degree of patience to a 12 year old child playing with a toy gun by himself in a playground
We all know what was different.
-
Having guns with presumably live ammo is a moot point. This is the United states and that is completely legal and one of our constitutional rights.
Not only to keep the arms, but also to bear them.
-
What's the justification for protecting two criminals? Were these men wrongly convicted?
-Probably not. The story of how it's come to this point is complicated. The main issue is not so much about guilt as it is about appropriate punishment. For more info on this topic read this earlier article from the Oregonian, http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2015/10/controversial_oregon_ranchers.html (http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2015/10/controversial_oregon_ranchers.html)
-
We all know what was different.
The 12 year old kid pulled the gun out and the adults legally open carried?
-
Eastern Oregon is predominately Republican thru and thru.
-
The 12 year old kid pulled the gun out and the adults legally open carried?
The kid had no weapon at all.
-
The kid had no weapon at all.
A toy gun can get you killed just as easy as a real one when it comes to the police. My mom made sure I was aware of this when I was a small child.
-
There is a perversity in a society that practices such forbearance yet was not able to afford any degree of patience to a 12 year old child playing with a toy gun by himself in a playground
Society didn't shoot the 12 year old. One cop of questionable mental and emotional competence did.
-
Society didn't shoot the 12 year old. One cop of questionable mental and emotional competence did.
I didn't say society killed the child
-
a group of adults clearly carrying real guns with presumably live ammunition take hold of government property (reportedly in support of a group of recently convicted arsonists) allow themselves to be interviewed by TV and other media while resisting removal by government forces (who seemingly facilitate such interviews even when claiming the offending occupants are terrorists.
So far nobody has been injured let alone killed
There is a perversity in a society that practices such forbearance yet was not able to afford any degree of patience to a 12 year old child playing with a toy gun by himself in a playground
The individual(s) that commit wrongdoing are responsible for their actions so think not to blame the whole for the actions of the one for if you do then by all means the entire country must fall upon a sword.
You first.
-
The individual(s) that commit wrongdoing are responsible for their actions so think not to blame the whole for the actions of the one for if you do then by all means the entire country must fall upon a sword.
You first.
I did not allocate blame
-
I didn't say society killed the child
Then why are you talking about the "perversity of a society that blah blah blah". The kid got smoked and probably shouldn't have. That has fuck all to do with society and what these white dudes are doing with the government.
-
Then why are you talking about the "perversity of a society that blah blah blah". The kid got smoked and probably shouldn't have. That has fuck all to do with society and what these white dudes are doing with the government.
because it is perverse
-
revolutionary rant by the lead actor. will give you a feeling for the agenda.
-
because it is perverse
Sweet Jeezus dude. I hope you at least make sense to yourself. lol.
-
I did not allocate blame
Yes, yes you did. Your words, not mine.
Thank you.
-
Sweet Jeezus dude. I hope you at least make sense to yourself. lol.
why are you so defensive about what I said ?
-
Yes, yes you did. Your words, not mine.
Thank you.
these were my words :
a group of adults clearly carrying real guns with presumably live ammunition take hold of government property (reportedly in support of a group of recently convicted arsonists) allow themselves to be interviewed by TV and other media while resisting removal by government forces (who seemingly facilitate such interviews even when claiming the offending occupants are terrorists.
So far nobody has been injured let alone killed
There is a perversity in a society that practices such forbearance yet was not able to afford any degree of patience to a 12 year old child playing with a toy gun by himself in a playground
-
these were my words :
There is a perversity in a society that practices such forbearance yet was not able to afford any degree of patience to a 12 year old child playing with a toy gun by himself in a playground
Contained within the above pull quote is a definite inference of that which you deny. It is not veiled in the least. If you say you did not mean it, then fine. You did not mean it.
But you still said it and I remarked upon it.
-
why are you so defensive about what I said ?
I love that tactic. Although it usually is "why are you so angry".
Look broseph I don't know what you are construing as being defensive. I just didn't care for your juxtaposition. Maybe you'd feel better if I added some smiley faces to my posts.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Having guns with presumably live ammo is a moot point. This is the United states and that is completely legal and one of our constitutional rights.
carrying a gun wihle committing a felony is a big deal. another decade in FL, i believe.
-
Contained within the above pull quote is a definite inference of that which you deny. It is not veiled in the least. If you say you did not mean it, then fine. You did not mean it.
But you still said it and I remarked upon it.
Perhaps we do not understand each other. I mean perverse as in incongruous, odd, inconsistent
-
I'm not angry nor do I think you are and yes I can see you don't like the juxtaposition. Perhaps as an outsider I have no right to make such observations?
You have every right to make any observation that you want. I wasn't offended, I just disagreed with your inference.
-
quoting a tweet:
Today I learned:
plural of armed black people is thugs
plural of armed brown people is terrorists
plural of armed white people is militia
-
quoting a tweet:
Today I learned:
plural of armed black people is thugs
plural of armed brown people is terrorists
plural of armed white people is militia
That is funny, but it's hard to find fault with those definitions. They are pretty accurate.
-
quoting a tweet:
Today I learned:
plural of armed black people is thugs
plural of armed brown people is terrorists
plural of armed white people is militia
I get the premise, but why doesn't the "Liberal" media use a different term since they supposedly love Muslims so much and are trying to bring about the downfall of the white race...
I'm sure you get what I'm saying.
-
I get the premise, but why doesn't the "Liberal" media use a different term since they supposedly love Muslims so much and are trying to bring about the downfall of the white race...
I'm sure you get what I'm saying.
ABC news taking major heat today for calling these folks peaceful protesters.
-
quoting a tweet:
Today I learned:
plural of armed black people is thugs
plural of armed brown people is terrorists
plural of armed white people is militia
now trending on twitter
#vanillaISIS
#Yallqaeda
-
now trending on twitter
#vanillaISIS
#Yallqaeda
Haha... Ok, those are good.
-
You have every right to make any observation that you want. I wasn't offended, I just disagreed with your inference.
I wasn't making any or intending to make any inference or juxtaposition (that is a very big word for this sight) by virtue of race, colour, ethnicity or even sexual orientation. The events are separated by distance and time but perhaps more significantly united by predictive reactions illustrating an inability or reluctance to think beyond the status quo
-
I wasn't making any or intending to make any inference or juxtaposition (that is a very big word for this sight) by virtue of race, colour, ethnicity or even sexual orientation. The events are separated by distance and time but perhaps more significantly united by predictive reactions illustrating an inability or reluctance to think beyond the status quo
I think you were, and are. Hence, you circle back again to how the events are united in this very post.
I'm confused as to why you are hesitant to take ownership of the point you most certainly were trying to make. The point contained in the post that originally sparked my reply to you. It's not as though there was anything wrong with what you said, I simply disagreed. I don't condemn you for your opinion. Yet I find you trying to mince words and blur the lines of our subtle disagreement to the point that it can no longer be simply understood. This is not necessary. It's become an exercise in rhetoric. A repetitive waste of time.
-
I wasn't making any or intending to make any inference or juxtaposition (that is a very big word for this sight) by virtue of race, colour, ethnicity or even sexual orientation. The events are separated by distance and time but perhaps more significantly united by predictive reactions illustrating an inability or reluctance to think beyond the status quo
oh brother, don't bother with the wackjobs
what you say makes perfect sense if you can accept that racism actually exists "in society". The double standard is obvious because the same idiots will turn around and make all kinds of generalizations about every other ethnic group.
Does it have anything to do with this situation? the DOJ is on record stating law enforcement and media react differently to right wing terrorists. Going so far as to allocate special resources to remedy the problem.
So ya it's official and it's also a simple thing to comprehend for civilized people.
-
This is so much more than taking over a building. This is a challenge to the current administration to see if they have the stones to forcibly take on gun-owners and if so, how much bloodshed and death they're willing to accept. Because if they call in the national guard or SWAT to try to take back that building by force, there will be hundreds of casualties. I believe the military and police would be reluctant to step in as neither supports the current commander in chief. This is a big fuck you to Obama and basically calling him a giant pussy, which he is. I suspect he'll overreact and show everyone what a mandatory confiscation of guns will look like: A bloodbath that results in the US government backing down.
-
Is it over reaction to take back a government building?
I'm not for any gun control, but what these are doing is going to end poorly for them and they will have no one to blame but themselves.
If they all got shot up, it would suck, but I wouldn't be able to say they were "wronged".
Would you?
-
I suspect he'll overreact and show everyone what a mandatory confiscation of guns will look like: A bloodbath that results in the US government backing down.
based on how he reacted regarding the Bundy Ranch standoff, he'll not give him the attention that they want, they'll sit for a week or two, get bored and go home. then a week or two later, indictments will be served and they'll be charged with illegal possession of firearms in a federal building.
-
Anybody remember this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Wisconsin_protests
The people "owned" those buildings at that protest. I thought it might get ugly there but it didn't.
So the issue here is that they have guns? I find it interesting that seems to be the only issue at a time when that is the only thing Ol Bammer is worried about coming back from vacation. We have made our politicians kings by not paying attention. Not only do I not trust the news to report events anymore, I don't even trust the events, haha.
And....these folks better remember Waco.
-
The federal govt let these folks- bundys son- get away with pointing guns at federal agents in 2014. So they grew bold, and now they're seizing property and threatening murder.
Maybe the govt was too soft on them last time? I don't care your reason- if you purposely point a gun at a fed, you should face some charges.
-
Their demands? Release he fed lands for mining, cattle and other purposes.
It's bout profit. Cash. Giving govt handouts to their private companies.
They didn't get arrested for pointing guns at fbi in 2014, so they got braver.
-
So how many shops were robbed, destroyed?
How many people were injured or killed?
-
can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs.
-
quoting a tweet:
Today I learned:
plural of armed black people is thugs
plural of armed brown people is terrorists
plural of armed white people is militia
True.
Funny thing is they're protesting for subsidies, a form of welfare. Can you imagine how people (here) would react if a bunch of black people occupied a county building asking for more money on their benefit cards? :)
-
True.
Funny thing is they're protesting for subsidies, a form of welfare. Can you imagine how people (here) would react if a bunch of black people occupied a county building asking for more money on their benefit cards? :)
imagine if dozens of muslims with rifles decided to break into a federal building, chase everyone away with death threats, then declare they'll be there for years until political prisoners are released - and they're willing to die for their cause.
Sickening to see the double standard. If these folks were brown and carrying Korans, snipers would be dropping their asses left and right.
-
What's the justification for protecting two criminals? Were these men wrongly convicted?
BINGO!
Regardless of race, the citizens must respect the rule of law or we get chaos.
-
LOL @ folks on social media trying to find ANY way to justify these actions.
"but look at all this land the govt has taken" and "maybe the trial was a sham"
These are separate issues. Threatening to kill people, breaking into govt buildings, blocking roads with vehicles and promising to 'take over' this state park for years while letting people frack, graze, poach, and dig in this park...
If you don't like it, vote the fckers out. Or run for office. Don't pick up a gun and threaten to murder Americans. They're terrorists, sorry, but their actions are all that matter here. The dude who was convicted doesn't even suppoert their cause. They just want money, and he's the reason they're using.
-
BINGO!
Regardless of race, the citizens must respect the rule of law or we get chaos.
yep. If 5000 people picked up rifles next sunday, and decided to copy them - break into/occupy any govt building closed for the day - we'd have chaos. They got away wtih blocking roads/pointing guns at feds last time, so they think it's okay this time.
-
imagine if dozens of muslims with rifles decided to break into a federal building, chase everyone away with death threats, then declare they'll be there for years until political prisoners are released - and they're willing to die for their cause.
Sickening to see the double standard. If these folks were brown and carrying Korans, snipers would be dropping their asses left and right.
Double standards exist because people are fine with them.
-
Patriotism
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=589511.0;attach=665206;image)
-
imagine if dozens of muslims with rifles decided to break into a federal building, chase everyone away with death threats, then declare they'll be there for years until political prisoners are released - and they're willing to die for their cause.
Sickening to see the double standard. If these folks were brown and carrying Korans, snipers would be dropping their asses left and right.
It's actually sickening how you keep comparing these guys to muzzies
-
possibly but you haven't invalidated the argument
What's the argument?
-
now trending
#yeehawd
#shanialaw
-
quoting a tweet:
Today I learned:
plural of armed black people is thugs
plural of armed brown people is terrorists
plural of armed white people is militia
double standard of peace ::)
-
now trending
#yeehawd
;D
-
possibly but you haven't invalidated the argument
chaos torpedoing head first into the conversation with reckless abandon
-
The problem is - we're moving away from "these armed people took over a building and threatened to kill americans while expressing desire to overthrow govt", and moving toward listing all the ways white people get wronged.
Two completely separate things.
Skin color shouldn't matter - actions should matter. If you get loaded up, and take over a govt building with threats of violence, you should probably see a jail cell, no matter what. If these people get sent home *again* with no punishment, then I'd hate to see what they do NEXT.
-
The armed takeover dudes are hungry. They want people to mail them snacks.
Yes, the want to overthrow the govt but they still want to enjoy the US Postal Service. Huh
-
They took over an unoccupied building.
-
whitey is a terrorist?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/03/opinions/kayyem-oregon-building-takeover-terrorism/
(CNN)Who the heck do they think they are?
Let's begin with what to call the Oregon anti-government protesters who have taken over a federal building. The men, heavily armed, urging others to come support their cause, and claiming somehow that, while peaceful, they will "defend" themselves whatever it takes, are -- by any definition -- domestic terrorists.
???
-
These dumbasses are just as bad as the Black Lives Matters morons. They both are wrong on their respective issue and both share the same victim mentality when each cause has stemmed from a legal result (the correct result) they did not like.
Fuck them all.
-
The problem is - we're moving away from "these armed people took over a building and threatened to kill americans while expressing desire to overthrow govt", and moving toward listing all the ways white people get wronged.
Two completely separate things.
Skin color shouldn't matter - actions should matter. If you get loaded up, and take over a govt building with threats of violence, you should probably see a jail cell, no matter what. If these people get sent home *again* with no punishment, then I'd hate to see what they do NEXT.
Back in the mid 1990's I worked out in a gym with a couple " militia" dudes.
They felt that blowing up the Oklahoma Gov building was fine . They somehow justified it as a legit attack on a
repressive Government .
The week after the 9/11 attacks , one came over to me and quietly said ;
" You were right Howard. Any attack on our Gov by a private group of people is a terrorist attack."
In my view, one either repsect the Gov system and rule of law of they don't. Pretty simple.
-
These dumbasses are just as bad as the Black Lives Matters morons. They both are wrong on their respective issue and both share the same victim mentality when each cause has stemmed from a legal result (the correct result) they did not like.
Fuck them all.
I agree with your statement.
-
They took over an unoccupied building.
they broke in.
On my street, there are unoccupied buildings - people up north for the summer that only vacation here. It's quite illegal for me to break into their homes just cause they're empty.
-
These dumbasses are just as bad as the Black Lives Matters morons. They both are wrong on their respective issue and both share the same victim mentality when each cause has stemmed from a legal result (the correct result) they did not like.
Fuck them all.
Not sure why it's so difficult for some people on getbig to understand this.
-
Not sure why it's so difficult for some people on getbig to understand this.
It's the if you're not with us, you're against us mentality. It's stupid... in reality, you can be against all of them.
-
It's the if you're not with us, you're against us mentality. It's stupid... in reality, you can be against all of them.
I still think there are alot of assumptions being made here. But from what I see, I can't agree with their occupation.
-
I still think there are alot of assumptions being made here. But from what I see, I can't agree with their occupation.
I agree. I can't find the justification in this instance.
-
Apparently they're patriots, LOL!
-
I agree. I can't find the justification in this instance.
Well, I can take consolation in the fact that they haven't burned down or looted any businesses or shot up or beheaded anyone.
Yet. ;D
-
Well, I can take consolation in the fact that they haven't burned down or looted any businesses or shot up or beheaded anyone.
Yet. ;D
Waco man... Waco.
-
Waco man... Waco.
Oh it's not going to end well for these guys I don't think. Just depends on how long the gov wants to wait them out.
-
LOL @ folks on social media trying to find ANY way to justify these actions.
"but look at all this land the govt has taken" and "maybe the trial was a sham"
These are separate issues. Threatening to kill people, breaking into govt buildings, blocking roads with vehicles and promising to 'take over' this state park for years while letting people frack, graze, poach, and dig in this park...
If you don't like it, vote the fckers out. Or run for office. Don't pick up a gun and threaten to murder Americans. They're terrorists, sorry, but their actions are all that matter here. The dude who was convicted doesn't even suppoert their cause. They just want money, and he's the reason they're using.
Occupiers did the same thing. In these cases all of these people are idiots.
-
Oh it's not going to end well for these guys I don't think. Just depends on how long the gov wants to wait them out.
So far, we must admit, the feds have been very patient with these guys.
Is this white privilege?
The privilege of getting to sit it out longer before getting shot up?
;D
-
Not sure why it's so difficult for some people on getbig to understand this.
Comes down to who you think is more dangerous, considering the scope, call to arms and threats of violence etc. It seems the legal authorities don't agree. for example the DOJ found the issues of rights abuses to be real in ferguson which shut down the whole town pretty much. So the claim that the issues are in dispute is incorrect.
Additionally, I haven't seen any 150 page terrorism reports on black rights activists so perhaps the terror experts aren't up to speed on this emerging threat? ???
I did find this on right wing terror though. enjoy.
https://www.ctc.usma.edu/posts/challengers-from-the-sidelines-understanding-americas-violent-far-right
Looking forward to seeing some factual support for this position!
-
These dumbasses are just as bad as the Black Lives Matters morons. They both are wrong on their respective issue and both share the same victim mentality when each cause has stemmed from a legal result (the correct result) they did not like.
Fuck them all.
I agree !
-
So far, we must admit, the feds have been very patient with these guys.
Is this white privilege?
The privilege of getting to sit it out longer before getting shot up?
;D
Why ask when everybody knows the answer?
Back guys would have been shot and we'd be past the 300th Dindu joke by now. Kwon_2 and that weird guy from Ireland would be dehydrated from masturbation, LOL!
-
Occupiers did the same thing. In these cases all of these people are idiots.
yeah, I was all for kicking the shit out of those lazy hippies when they violated any laws. peaceably assemble where it's allowed, but if you want to take a shit in a public park, then you should be tazed/beanbagged/maced into the next week. I have no mercy for ANY protester that breaks the law- that's cool, but accept the consequences.
Some on Getbig and on social media try to make what these oregon people are doing okay, by saying "well, it's not as bad as..." so they can bitch about the other groups they hate. It's entirely possible they're ALL lawbreaking a-holes who should be sharing jail cells.
-
So, The Bundy Militia are separate from the Hammond Family, right?
-
I can't wait to see how President cockbreath and his "justice department" handle this.
-
30 years ago, a black anti-government group in Philadelphia, MOVE, were bombed and burned alive for directing their weapons at police.
http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/05/13/406243272/im-from-philly-30-years-later-im-still-trying-to-make-sense-of-the-move-bombing
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/04/3735745/move-vs-oregon-standoff/
-
Tim drops a little reality on the discussion.
-
The Hammonds turned themselves in today.
So now it's just Bundy's crew being pieces of shit. Time to go home, Bundy.
-
Y'allQaeda is asking for trouble. They don't even have the Hammond family's support.
-
The best Bundy.
(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/ab/ab298655106bbd6daf304cbd90186ecea78e48eb44caa76b6c1696e6e2f3d4e4.jpg)
-
Lol at any universe where these cats aren't in handcuffs already.
It's been almost 3 days. They're starying gofundmes for snacks. They can't event be militant badasses correctly.
-
30 years ago, a black anti-government group in Philadelphia, MOVE, were bombed and burned alive for directing their weapons at police.
http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/05/13/406243272/im-from-philly-30-years-later-im-still-trying-to-make-sense-of-the-move-bombing
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/04/3735745/move-vs-oregon-standoff/
Got anything of relevance? 30 years........ ::)
Why ask when everybody knows the answer?
Back guys would have been shot and we'd be past the 300th Dindu joke by now. Kwon_2 and that weird guy from Ireland would be dehydrated from masturbation, LOL!
Sorry dude, gotta call bullshit on that. Be realistic here. I don't agree with these guys or support their movement, but to say if they were replaced with blacks doing the same exact thing they'd be shot is wrong. Deep down you know it.
-
Got anything of relevance? 30 years........ ::)
Sorry dude, gotta call bullshit on that. Be realistic here. I don't agree with these guys or support their movement, but to say if they were replaced with blacks doing the same exact thing they'd be shot is wrong. Deep down you know it.
Apparently the current AG, Eric Holder did something similar at Columbia and was not only not shot, but was not charged with a crime either.
-
30 years ago, a black anti-government group in Philadelphia, MOVE, were bombed and burned alive for directing their weapons at police.
http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/05/13/406243272/im-from-philly-30-years-later-im-still-trying-to-make-sense-of-the-move-bombing
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/04/3735745/move-vs-oregon-standoff/
Oh yea John Africa. Lot of people died and a lot of property was fucked up
-
Got anything of relevance? 30 years........ ::)
Sorry dude, gotta call bullshit on that. Be realistic here. I don't agree with these guys or support their movement, but to say if they were replaced with blacks doing the same exact thing they'd be shot is wrong. Deep down you know it.
They'd be dead before we knew what the protest was about.
-
Got anything of relevance? 30 years........ ::)
why is that not relevant? Right wingers are alway bringing up Saint Ronnie. Under the Ronald Reagan administration, a black cult made threats against the US government, and they ended up dead, even those who were trying to surrender. Under Obama, twice now, white right wing fanatics make threats against the US government, point assault weapons at federal marshals, and live to see the next day.
-
They'd be dead before we knew what the protest was about.
Yet somehow they're allowed to riot through the streets destroying businesses and cop cars again and again without being blasted? BLM gets on major freeways and stops traffic while "protesting" and none are shot or run over? Come on doc. Set race aside and look at how the 2 different groups are conducting themselves.
-
Yet somehow they're allowed to riot through the streets destroying businesses and cop cars again and again without being blasted? BLM gets on major freeways and stops traffic while "protesting" and none are shot or run over? Come on doc. Set race aside and look at how the 2 different groups are conducting themselves.
One is carrying signs and chanting slogans against police killings. The other is pointing assault weapons at federal officials and talking about overthrowing the government.
-
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B3JqIceKh6I
Watch the whole thing. Truth. Please listen to the whole reading of this open letter before you speak of what you think you know to be right.
-
pointing guns at feds. weren't even charged. that's some bullshit right there.
-
One is carrying signs and chanting slogans against police killings. The other is pointing assault weapons at federal officials and talking about overthrowing the government.
Lmfao!! No need to continue conversation with someone that can't see a difference.
pointing guns at feds. weren't even charged. that's some bullshit right there.
You sound really bitter and jealous. At least you're not stalking Coach, whining about Trump anymore.
-
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B3JqIceKh6I
Watch the whole thing. Truth. Please listen to the whole reading of this open letter before you speak of what you think you know to be right.
-
why is that not relevant? Right wingers are alway bringing up Saint Ronnie. Under the Ronald Reagan administration, a black cult made threats against the US government, and they ended up dead, even those who were trying to surrender. Under Obama, twice now, white right wing fanatics make threats against the US government, point assault weapons at federal marshals, and live to see the next day.
So shouldn't Obama want to off a couple of crackers? Why doesn't he? He would be completely justified right now.
-
So shouldn't Obama want to off a couple of crackers? Why doesn't he? He would be completely justified right now.
Tims still living decades in the past. :-\
-
Lmfao!! No need to continue conversation with someone that can't see a difference.
Do you mean can't see the similarities?
BLM is a civil rights movement similar to all the ones of the last 50 years: marches, minor civil disobedience. They do not advocate violence or property damage. Of the 1500+ BLM marches of the last 1.5 years, only a few have had property damage done by outside agitators.
These white militias advocate the overthrow of the US government, taking over federal buildings, are carrying assault weapons, pointing them at government officials, vowing to die for their cause.
OWS occupy a city park and the police lock up all the toilets. So far the federal marshals haven't even bothered turning off the electricity to the Oregon building
-
One is carrying signs and chanting slogans against police killings. The other is pointing assault weapons at federal officials and talking about overthrowing the government.
Which assault weapon has been pointed at federal officials?
-
Which assault weapon has been pointed at federal officials?
In 2014, this same group was photographed pointing rifles at the Feds.
I'm all for protest, but once you point a weapon...
They stopped people, shut down roads, and got away with it too. So they were very bold this time.
-
In 2014, this same group was photographed pointing rifles at the Feds.
I'm all for protest, but once you point a weapon...
They stopped people, shut down roads, and got away with it too. So they were very bold this time.
As I asked... which ASSAULT weapon has been pointed at federal officials...
Specifically this time.
-
As I asked... which ASSAULT weapon has been pointed at federal officials...
Specifically this time.
This time? None. They just carried them in and said they were here to kill. Didn't point them this time. But carrying a weapon while committing a crime (they broke into federal bundling) is a felony.
Either way, they're breaking laws.
-
I don't know what an "assault" weapon is. A rock can be an assault weapon. A gun is just another tool.
Ted Cruz has called for them to stand down. Said they're committing a crime. Doesn't want a standoff. Said there's no right to engage in violence against other Americans.
And cruz did support them in 2014.
-
what does this letter have to do with these guys?
they want a bunch of tax payer funded land to be handed over for private ownership.
does this letter discuss the value of that property which is in the trillions?
does it discuss the use of violence to achieve that end?
I didn't read it (normally one reads letters) but let me know if it does.
-
I don't know what an "assault" weapon is. A rock can be an assault weapon. A gun is just another tool.
Ted Cruz has called for them to stand down. Said they're committing a crime. Doesn't want a standoff. Said there's no right to engage in violence against other Americans.
And cruz did support them in 2014.
Finally you get the point I'm making Rob.
What the fuck is an assault weapon?
I didn't call it that.
Someone else did. They don't even know what the fuck an assault weapon is... and I would have to see what these guys were carrying to even say they were some kind of assault "rifle" in the first place.
Being accurate is kind of important.
What are they carrying? Do you know? Seen photos? Anyone?
Of course they are committing a crime... Fucking DUH.
I haven't been denying otherwise and have said since minute one that they are wrong.
-
Raw story posted pics Sunday mornings. Wearing ar 15 rifles
-
Raw story posted pics Sunday mornings. Wearing ar 15 rifles
You do know that an AR-15 is not an "assault rifle" right?
You also know that in gun terminology an "assault weapon" didn't even exist until politicians created the word.
So since you've answered my questions I posed to Tim, what do you think of Tim's statements?
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban
Under the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 the definition of "semiautomatic assault weapon" included specific semi-automatic firearm models by name, and other semi-automatic firearms that possessed two or more from a set certain features:[11]
Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Bayonet mount
Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
Grenade launcher mount
Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
Barrel shroud safety feature that prevents burns to the operator
Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.
Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:
Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Detachable magazine.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban
Under the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 the definition of "semiautomatic assault weapon" included specific semi-automatic firearm models by name, and other semi-automatic firearms that possessed two or more from a set certain features:[11]
Semi-automatic rifles able to accept detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Bayonet mount
Flash suppressor, or threaded barrel designed to accommodate one
Grenade launcher mount
Semi-automatic pistols with detachable magazines and two or more of the following:
Magazine that attaches outside the pistol grip
Threaded barrel to attach barrel extender, flash suppressor, handgrip, or suppressor
Barrel shroud safety feature that prevents burns to the operator
Unloaded weight of 50 oz (1.4 kg) or more
A semi-automatic version of a fully automatic firearm.
Semi-automatic shotguns with two or more of the following:
Folding or telescoping stock
Pistol grip
Detachable magazine.
Which means nothing.
Tim, I get you don't know anything about firearms.
There is not such thing as an "assault weapon".
It is a political term made up to make people who don't know be afraid.
Here's a quick thing for you to check out.
http://www.assaultweapon.info/
-
Which means nothing.
Tim, I get you don't know anything about firearms.
There is not such thing as an "assault weapon".
It is a political term made up to make people who don't know be afraid.
Here's a quick thing for you to check out.
http://www.assaultweapon.info/
X2 Tim seems like a nice guy but clearly knows very little about guns, nothing wrong with that.
-
X2 Tim seems like a nice guy but clearly knows very little about guns, nothing wrong with that.
Absolutely.
Guns aren't for everyone, it's fine, but don't just let some political wording get engrained into you and just go along with it.
-
Absolutely.
Guns aren't for everyone, it's fine, but don't just let some political wording get engrained into you and just go along with it.
Yes. Most people don't even realize that AR as in ar15 doesn't stand for assault rifle.
Also they don't know what semi-automatic means.
-
Yes. Most people don't even realize that AR as in ar15 doesn't stand for assault rifle.
Also they don't know what semi-automatic means.
I don't mind that people don't know either... What I do mind is that people don't care to educate themselves about them before they start saying a lot of things.
I might argue a lot and sometimes I'm stubborn as hell, but I do "try" to educate myself about things before I start going towards one side of anything or the other.
-
Yet somehow they're allowed to riot through the streets destroying businesses and cop cars again and again without being blasted? BLM gets on major freeways and stops traffic while "protesting" and none are shot or run over? Come on doc. Set race aside and look at how the 2 different groups are conducting themselves.
Throw guns into the mix of a BLM protest and what happens?
It's not about race but instances like this remind us how big the gap is when it comes to rights and interacting with law enforcement.
-
Yes. Most people don't even realize that AR as in ar15 doesn't stand for assault rifle.
Also they don't know what semi-automatic means.
A=Assault
R=Rifle
??? ???
-
I don't mind that people don't know either... What I do mind is that people don't care to educate themselves about them before they start saying a lot of things.
I might argue a lot and sometimes I'm stubborn as hell, but I do "try" to educate myself about things before I start going towards one side of anything or the other.
If we did that.....there would be no traffic on getbig outside of the nudie room.
-
30 years ago, a black anti-government group in Philadelphia, MOVE, were bombed and burned alive for directing their weapons at police.
http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/05/13/406243272/im-from-philly-30-years-later-im-still-trying-to-make-sense-of-the-move-bombing
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/04/3735745/move-vs-oregon-standoff/
Wrong again Tim. They were bombed , burned alive for shooting at police.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOVE
On May 13, 1985, the police, along with city manager Leo Brooks, arrived in force with arrest warrants and attempted to clear the building and arrest the indicted MOVE members.[15] This led to an armed standoff with police,[16] who lobbed tear gas canisters at the building. MOVE members fired at the police
-
A=Assault
R=Rifle
??? ???
A= Armalite
R=Rifle
-
A = Anal
R = Rampage
-
No one remembered to bring food? Some survivalists. ::)
These revolutionist bitches are decent looking tho. After awhile it'd be: Hey, hubby. Why don't you stfu about the federal government for one night and liberate my twat, you know?
-
Tim sounds miserable.
-
Throw guns into the mix of a BLM protest and what happens?
They all shoot each other ???
Couldn't resist. ;D
-
I'm trying to wrap my head around this story. From what I've read so far, a group of privileged ranchers are pissed because the BLM has taken back federal land, because the ranchers stopped paying dues? Also, 2 of the ranchers were sentenced to prison for committing arson and poaching on BLM land? Now a group of tactical cowboys want to take back all of the BLM land for the people, they want it for free, and they want they're demanding the release of the 2 ranchers who are in prison?
To a normal person, this sounds like a seccession.
I want some free land too. ???
-
whether they have a .22 handgun, or an M-16, they have a firearm while breaking into federal property. Felony.
The fact it's an AR-15 makes them that much more dangerous... they can very quickly place 30 shots into a target at 100 yard fairly easier... bad news for law enforcement.
I'm not about labeling guns, I'm just about putting lawbreakers in jail.
-
they already get a 93% discount on the land. They want a 100% discount.
this will give them a competitive advantage so they can grow their personal wealth. They also want to assign fracking, mining, and hunting rights of the land to their buddies also. For a fee? Who knows.
-
A statement from the mormons (the sect these fine upstanding gentlemen belong to)
While the disagreement occurring in Oregon about the use of federal lands is not a Church matter, Church leaders strongly condemn the armed seizure of the facility and are deeply troubled by the reports that those who have seized the facility suggest that they are doing so based on scriptural principles. This armed occupation can in no way be justified on a scriptural basis. We are privileged to live in a nation where conflicts with government or private groups can — and should — be settled using peaceful means, according to the laws of the land.
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-responds-to-inquiries-regarding-oregon-armed-occupation
#yeehawd
The Bundys’ challenge to federal authority has deep roots in the church’s history. After an angry mob lynched Mormon’s founding father Joseph Smith in 1844, every man entering the church swore an “oath of vengeance” against the United States, which refused to recognize Smith’s new religious awakening.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/01/05/oregon-standoff-has-roots-mormon-fanaticism/QLgIkrNZipFjtbn4AyUZFJ/story.html
-
They all shoot each other ???
Couldn't resist. ;D
Beef would break out, LOL!
-
A=Assault
R=Rifle
??? ???
This is not correct.
Armalite Rifle.
Armalite was the original designer of the weapon. Who sold it to Colt.
-
statement from the Sheriff
-
This is not correct.
Armalite Rifle.
Armalite was the original designer of the weapon. Who sold it to Colt.
A=Air
R=Rifle
Air Rifle? ??? ???
-
Anal
Retentive
-
fyi (the law considers certain variants of AR 15 "assault weapons")
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15#United_States
During the period 1994–2004 variants with certain features such as collapsible stocks, flash suppressors, and bayonet lugs were prohibited for sales to civilians by the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, with the included Federal Assault Weapons Ban.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15s_in_California
If the rifle was owned before Jan 1, 2000 and registered with the state, it is a Registered Assault Weapon (RAW) under California law. No new registrations are permitted. RAW rifles can have features which are prohibited in unregistered rifles. This category is the only one which allows for the use of the name "AR-15" on the firearm itself, which is owned by the Colt Manufacturing Company. California has banned the AR-15 rifle specifically by name. Therefore, no other rifles are legal to possess with such a name without having first been lawfully registered as an assault weapon with the DOJ. Otherwise, one is in felony possession of an unregistered assault weapon for which no legal remedy exists if kept beyond the previously granted DOJ assault weapon registration grace period.
-
shenanigans from 2014
watch the cops tase ammon bundy
haha
-
fyi (the law considers certain variants of AR 15 "assault weapons")
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15#United_States
During the period 1994–2004 variants with certain features such as collapsible stocks, flash suppressors, and bayonet lugs were prohibited for sales to civilians by the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, with the included Federal Assault Weapons Ban.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15s_in_California
If the rifle was owned before Jan 1, 2000 and registered with the state, it is a Registered Assault Weapon (RAW) under California law. No new registrations are permitted. RAW rifles can have features which are prohibited in unregistered rifles. This category is the only one which allows for the use of the name "AR-15" on the firearm itself, which is owned by the Colt Manufacturing Company. California has banned the AR-15 rifle specifically by name. Therefore, no other rifles are legal to possess with such a name without having first been lawfully registered as an assault weapon with the DOJ. Otherwise, one is in felony possession of an unregistered assault weapon for which no legal remedy exists if kept beyond the previously granted DOJ assault weapon registration grace period.
As has already been stated, an "Assault Weapon" is a made up word for politicians.
Before 1989 there was no such word or weapon as an "Assault Weapon".
-
As has already been stated, an "Assault Weapon" is a made up word for politicians.
Before 1989 there was no such word or weapon as an "Assault Weapon".
It's no longer a meaningless term if you're guilty of a felony for having an AR15 under "assault weapons" law. Try telling that to the judge and let me know how it goes. :D
I'm inclined to think it came out of industry to describe new products. new products = new terminology pretty simple. If you ask the gun lobby they may state "it's a made up term" for obvious reasons but I don't see any evidence for that.
here's some discussion on it for reference;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon#History_of_terminology
-
It's no longer a meaningless term if you're guilty of a felony for having an AR15 under "assault weapons" law. Try telling that to the judge and let me know how it goes. :D
I'm inclined to think it came out of industry to describe new products. new products = new terminology pretty simple. If you ask the gun lobby they may state "it's a made up term" for obvious reasons but I don't see any evidence for that.
here's some discussion on it for reference;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon#History_of_terminology
I don't see any evidence it was created by the industry.
The industry has always used the term "machine guns".
It is definitely a political term.
-
I don't see any evidence it was created by the industry.
The industry has always used the term "machine guns".
It is definitely a political term.
I don't know personally but the guy that wrote this book doesn't agree with you. Is the author a politician with some sort of agenda?
???
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/510maRXxd3L._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
The popularly held idea that the term 'assault weapon' originated with anti-gun activists is wrong. The term was first adopted by manufacturers, wholesalers, importers and dealers in the American firearms industry to stimulate sales of certain firearms that did not have an appearance that was familiar to many firearms owners. The manufacturers and gun writers of the day needed a catchy name to identify this new type of gun.
About the author (2008)
Phillip Peterson is a full-time, federally licensed dealer with 25 years experience in military firearms and collectibles. A certified gunsmith, he is also a featured columnist for Gun Digest magazine.
-
From your link turbo
History of terminology
Prior to its use in U.S. firearms laws, the term "assault weapon" was limited to naming certain military weapons, for example, the Rifleman's Assault Weapon, a grenade launcher developed in 1977 for use with the M16 assault rifle,[19] or the Shoulder-launched Multipurpose Assault Weapon, a rocket launcher introduced in 1984.[20]
In April 1985, Art Agnos introduced in the California State Assembly a bill to ban semi-automatic "assault firearms" capable of using detachable magazines of 20 rounds or more.[21][22] Speaking to the Assembly Public Safety Committee, Agnos said, "The only use for assault weapons is to shoot people."[21] The measure did not pass when it came up for a vote.[22]
In 2013, The Washington Post wrote of the term: "Many attribute its popularization to a 1988 paper written by gun-control activist and Violence Policy Center founder Josh Sugarmann and the later reaction to the Cleveland School massacre in Stockton, California, in January 1989."[5] Sugarmann had written:
-
I don't know personally but the guy that wrote this book doesn't agree with you. Is the author a politician with some sort of agenda?
???
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/510maRXxd3L._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
The popularly held idea that the term 'assault weapon' originated with anti-gun activists is wrong. The term was first adopted by manufacturers, wholesalers, importers and dealers in the American firearms industry to stimulate sales of certain firearms that did not have an appearance that was familiar to many firearms owners. The manufacturers and gun writers of the day needed a catchy name to identify this new type of gun.
Ok.. So let's say that's accurate. Which I'm not inclined to agree with. Considering the book you are posting about was printed in 2008, about 20 years after the term was first created by politicians, but again, let's go with your faulty premise.
The weapons that were considered "Assault Weapons" were fully automatic machine guns. M-16. AK-47s. All Military Fully-Automatic weapons.
The AR-15 is not a fully automatic weapon at all and there is already a ban on fully automatic weapons.
So the terminology is used completely improperly which is the point I'm making in the first place.
-
Should have all rode up on bulls painted red, white, & blue while playing The Halls of Montezuma. Show a little pizzazz. No one wants to join a drab rebellion.
-
Ok.. So let's say that's accurate. Which I'm not inclined to agree with. Considering the book you are posting about was printed in 2008, about 20 years after the term was first created by politicians, but again, let's go with your faulty premise.
The weapons that were considered "Assault Weapons" were fully automatic machine guns. M-16. AK-47s. All Military Fully-Automatic weapons.
The AR-15 is not a fully automatic weapon at all and there is already a ban on fully automatic weapons.
So the terminology is used completely improperly which is the point I'm making in the first place.
it's not my premise. if you have some evidence that it was a term manufactured by politicians I suggest you bring it to the attention of Gun Digest:
http://www.gundigest.com/about-us
they should know the truth given that they claim to be the world foremost authority on guns. They say the term comes out of industry. I'm sure they will be happy to have this new information and revise the books they've been publishing.
I would encourage you to look into this matter a bit more and remain open to new information.
;)
-
From your link turbo
History of terminology
Prior to its use in U.S. firearms laws, the term "assault weapon" was limited to naming certain military weapons, for example, the Rifleman's Assault Weapon, a grenade launcher developed in 1977 for use with the M16 assault rifle,[19] or the Shoulder-launched Multipurpose Assault Weapon, a rocket launcher introduced in 1984.[20]
In April 1985, Art Agnos introduced in the California State Assembly a bill to ban semi-automatic "assault firearms" capable of using detachable magazines of 20 rounds or more.[21][22] Speaking to the Assembly Public Safety Committee, Agnos said, "The only use for assault weapons is to shoot people."[21] The measure did not pass when it came up for a vote.[22]
In 2013, The Washington Post wrote of the term: "Many attribute its popularization to a 1988 paper written by gun-control activist and Violence Policy Center founder Josh Sugarmann and the later reaction to the Cleveland School massacre in Stockton, California, in January 1989."[5] Sugarmann had written:
you see here this indicates the term may have been "popularized" by an anti-gun activist. Nothing there about invention big diff.
-
“Assault rifle” was first used to describe a military weapon, the Sturmgewehr, produced by the Germans in World War II. The Sturmgewehr — literally “storm rifle,” a name chosen by Adolf Hitler — was capable of both semiautomatic and full-automatic fire. It was the progenitor for many modern military rifles.
From the same New York Times article you quoted...wonder why you skipped this part?
-
“Assault rifle” was first used to describe a military weapon, the Sturmgewehr, produced by the Germans in World War II. The Sturmgewehr — literally “storm rifle,” a name chosen by Adolf Hitler — was capable of both semiautomatic and full-automatic fire. It was the progenitor for many modern military rifles.
From the same New York Times article you quoted...wonder why you skipped this part?
I believe were discussing the term "assault weapon". You quoted comments on "assault rifle". once again big diff!
-
I believe were discussing the term "assault weapon". You quoted comments on "assault rifle". once again big diff!
HAHAH ok well then it looks like the first instance is from 1985 when a democratic congressman proposed banning "assault weapons" prior to that in 1984 guns and ammo used the term "assault firearms" which apparently is completely different ::)
-
I believe were discussing the term "assault weapon". You quoted comments on "assault rifle". once again big diff!
Assault: a physical attack
Weapon: a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage.
Yes you are correct and assault weapon could be rock or hammer
-
HAHAH ok well then it looks like the first instance is from 1985 when a democratic congressman proposed banning "assault weapons" prior to that in 1984 guns and ammo used the term "assault firearms" which apparently is completely different ::)
where do you get this information?
It's pretty clearly an industry term that has fallen out of fashion because it's linked to unpopular control measures. But that's just what the guys who wrote the book about it say. It could be wrong but so far you have not brought forward any better sources.
-
Assault: a physical attack
Weapon: a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage.
Yes you are correct and assault weapon could be rock or hammer
it's a broad term but really the claim that it's meaningless doesn't apply to folks that don't want to go to jail. Rocks don't show up on banned lists of "assault weapons". Like I said before let us know what the judge says about this defence. I wish you luck!
Here's the truth;
The industry made up the terminology to make money off a new set of products.
Now that they're banned, they can't make money off the label so the label is "meaningless" (according to gun lobbyists).
-
it's a broad term but really the claim that it's meaningless doesn't apply to folks that don't want to go to jail. Rocks don't show up on banned lists of "assault weapons". Like I said before let us know what the judge says about this defence. I wish you luck!
Here's the truth;
The industry made up the terminology to make money off a new set of products.
Now that they're banned, they can't make money off the label so the label is "meaningless" (according to gun lobbyists).
The point I am trying to make is, calling something an assault weapon is ridiculous. Just because some jackass politico comes up with a list of things like and adjustable stock or pistol grip does not make the weapon any more or less lethal than a weapon of the same caliber that doesn't have it.
-
The point I am trying to make is, calling something an assault weapon is ridiculous. Just because some jackass politico comes up with a list of things like and adjustable stock or pistol grip does not make the weapon any more or less lethal than a weapon of the same caliber that doesn't have it.
you're probably right. one would have to look at the law to see if that's what's actually claimed. I'm quickly becoming an expert on this. :D
-
The point I am trying to make is, calling something an assault weapon is ridiculous. Just because some jackass politico comes up with a list of things like and adjustable stock or pistol grip does not make the weapon any more or less lethal than a weapon of the same caliber that doesn't have it.
Don't try to use reality here. It doesn't go far.
Mr. Turbo is now an "expert" on firearms.
::)
-
Don't try to use reality here. It doesn't go far.
Mr. Turbo is now an "expert" on firearms.
::)
judging by this conversation the bar is set pretty low
for the record, "becoming an expert"
If you're gonna demand precision with language you should employ these principles yourself!
;D
-
judging by this conversation the bar is set pretty low
for the record, "becoming an expert"
If you're gonna demand precision with language you should employ these principles yourself!
;D
I would rather have this conversation with someone who wants gun control that has at least touched a gun.
You're right. The bar is exceptionally low.
-
I would rather have this conversation with someone who wants gun control that has at least touched a gun.
You're right. The bar is exceptionally low.
I don't have much to say about gun control except that to make a convincing argument you'd have to prove the measures reduce the ridiculous gun related death rates in the US. It would be nice to know how they back it up. That's the more interesting conversation because when you look at the domestic terror issue, as bad as it is, it's really nothing close to gun related deaths. The US is way out there with a bunch of third world countries statistically.
-
where do you get this information?
It's pretty clearly an industry term that has fallen out of fashion because it's linked to unpopular control measures. But that's just what the guys who wrote the book about it say. It could be wrong but so far you have not brought forward any better sources.
Haha are you kidding me kid? I got that from your own link dumb ass
-
Haha are you kidding me kid? I got that from your own link dumb ass
ok here's a question for you.
If the term originated with this guy as he was making a speech about his gun ban law in 1985.
How did anyone know what he was talking about? it would have been the first time anyone had heard the term.
take your time with this one tommy...let me know what you come up with.
-
ok here's a question for you.
If the term originated with this guy as he was making a speech about his gun ban law in 1985.
How did anyone know what he was talking about? it would have been the first time anyone had heard the term.
take your time with this one tommy...let me know what you come up with.
That's how lexicon and jargon work.
People know what terms like ratchet and twerk mean. Someone made them up once and the words took over. Eventually becoming common place.
Both of those words came after 1985 and yet we know what they mean. That's how language works. For better or worse.
-
ok here's a question for you.
If the term originated with this guy as he was making a speech about his gun ban law in 1985.
How did anyone know what he was talking about? it would have been the first time anyone had heard the term.
take your time with this one tommy...let me know what you come up with.
Haha seriously kid, how fucking old are you?
When you propose banning something you have to define what you're banning....The reason people knew what he was talking about is b/c the legislation spelled it out you fucktard
-
Sometimes I wish they would just ban all guns so I could just sit back and watch the carnage and say "told you so".
-
Sometimes I wish they would just ban all guns so I could just sit back and watch the carnage and say "told you so".
Well. They can ban everyone else's. I'm keeping mine.
-
Haha seriously kid, how fucking old are you?
When you propose banning something you have to define what you're banning....The reason people knew what he was talking about is b/c the legislation spelled it out you fucktard
it's a stretch to accept that a state assembly hearing is the venue to coin new terminology for weapons.
This doesn't pass the sniff test. We must use common sense.
Anyway, the link you're citing clearly states the term was used in the 70's to describe military weaponry. I suggest you have another look at it, again!
-
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b24/hybenamon/LAND/INFANTRY/RAW/brochure-cover.jpg)
The Rifleman's Assault Weapon (also called RAW) is a close-support rocket-propelled grenade developed around 1977 and put into limited service by the United States Marine Corps in the 1990s.[1] It was developed in response to a military requirement for a multi-purpose close support weapon. The RAW's rocket-propelled spherical munition is fired from an M16 rifle and is capable of blowing holes through masonry walls and disabling light armored vehicles. Some have nicknamed the Rifleman's Assault Weapon the "softball from Hell".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rifleman%27s_Assault_Weapon
-
(http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/grenade/gl26/smaw-1.jpg)
The Shoulder-Launched Multipurpose Assault Weapon (SMAW) is a shoulder-launched rocket weapon with the primary function of being a portable assault weapon (e.g. bunker buster) and a secondary anti-armor rocket launcher. It was introduced to the United States armed forces in 1984.[1] It has a maximum range of 500 metres (550 yd) against a tank-sized target.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoulder-launched_Multipurpose_Assault_Weapon
-
20 pages 8)
-
it's a stretch to accept that a state assembly hearing is the venue to coin new terminology for weapons.
This doesn't pass the sniff test. We must use common sense.
Anyway, the link you're citing clearly states the term was used in the 70's to describe military weaponry. I suggest you have another look at it, again!
Not a stretch as it was a piece of legislation...and the link you posted says it was originally used to describe a weapon during WW2...
Anyways im done with trying to educate stupid people
-
NOBODY is supporting these oregeon squatters anymore.
Sunday, everyone was saying how awesome they were.
Tuesday, it's crickets. Kazan, have you changed your mind on them?
-
BREAKING NEWS 10pm
protesters are bringing in bulldozers and heavy equipment. They said they need it for protection in a firefight.
how the F are they getting equipment in? LOL
Ah, and they said they "found a stack of keys" which is how they've been breaking into the buildings.
-
now we have a video of an old man... says he has warrants for his arrest... he said he will shoot and kill any federal agent that has a weapon. (Um, they all do lol...) He said I will not go to prison, I am prepared to shoot.
He's hiding under a tarp. Reporters interviewing him. It's like the biggest hillbilly protester collection I've ever seen. No organization. A bunch of angry people who broke into federal buildings on a saturday night, and just took over lol.
-
Sometimes I wish they would just ban all guns so I could just sit back and watch the carnage and say "told you so".
Kind of like what happened in Australia.
-
I would rather have this conversation with someone who wants gun control that has at least touched a gun.
You're right. The bar is exceptionally low.
turns out research on the causes of gun violence has been banned for decades in the US. 34,000 die a year but you can't study it. Makes it tough to have a proper conversation about it. unless you want to talk about why there's a ban on such research.
http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-07-02/quietly-congress-extends-ban-cdc-research-gun-violence
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/cdc-still-cant-study-causes-gun-violence-180955884/?no-ist
The National Research Council’s 2004 report Firearms and Violence, a landmark assessment of the state of knowledge in the field, put it this way: “The inadequacy of data on gun ownership and use is among the most critical barriers to a better understanding of gun violence. […] If policy makers are to have a solid empirical and research base for decisions about firearms and violence, the federal government needs to support a systematic program of data collection and research that specifically addresses that issue.”12
https://everytownresearch.org/the-congressional-ban-on-gun-violence-prevention-research/
This is why the "debates" are endless on the issue. NOBODY understands it.
-
Fail to see your point here Tim. Seems you get a lot of your info from the one sided extreme left rag "think progress".
Coach, do you defend these Oregon protesters in any way?
-
Pages of Peace 8)
-
I'm praying this standoff goes on for as long as possible.
It's not a matter of principle but from a strategy point of view I'm all for it.
(like supporting the trump campaign, the plane has taken off but is headed straight for the side of a mountain!)
team 40 page thread of peace
;D
-
Kind of like what happened in Australia.
For reasons known best to you (and you will doubtless reveal more of them than what you have to date) you are a miserable sod and as the old saying goes, misery enjoys company.
Near as one can tell, no one invited you to this party.
Ridiculous.
-
Kind of like what happened in Australia.
Yes Tim all the violence stopped after Port Arthur , well at least the gun violence , Oh wait
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Australia
-
I don't have much to say about gun control except that to make a convincing argument you'd have to prove the measures reduce the ridiculous gun related death rates in the US. It would be nice to know how they back it up. That's the more interesting conversation because when you look at the domestic terror issue, as bad as it is, it's really nothing close to gun related deaths. The US is way out there with a bunch of third world countries statistically.
Statistically you are more likely to be killed by a car than a gun in the US.
-
cars don't kill people , people kill people
Guns don't kill people, the bullets mostly do. :D
-
the protesters are starting to worry.
talking on camera about what charges they may be facing. One has to get home soon to feed his cows.
they're less convinced they won't be charged.
Trying to reason "since I don't see any 'no trespassing' signs, they cannot charge me"
Good call, Brofessor.
-
the protesters are starting to worry.
talking on camera about what charges they may be facing. One has to get home soon to feed his cows.
they're less convinced they won't be charged.
Trying to reason "since I don't see any 'no trespassing' signs, they cannot charge me"
Good call, Brofessor.
This is some funny shit. Where are you getting the feed?
-
This is some funny shit. Where are you getting the feed?
Probably from here. (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=589511.msg8361543#msg8361543)
-
the protesters are starting to worry.
talking on camera about what charges they may be facing. One has to get home soon to feed his cows.
they're less convinced they won't be charged.
Trying to reason "since I don't see any 'no trespassing' signs, they cannot charge me"
Good call, Brofessor.
lol, "Sorry, I cant protest the government any more. I have to go home and feed my cows." :D :D
-
lol, "Sorry, I cant protest the government any more. I have to go home and feed my cows." :D :D
Cows > All
-
lol, "Sorry, I cant protest the government any more. I have to go home and feed my cows." :D :D
#cowslivesmatter
-
Ok... Seriously. This has been going on for what, 4 days now?
It's just time to end this nonsense.
Does the Federal Government believe they will just starve them out?
At this point, it's time to do something.
-
Statistically you are more likely to be killed by a car than a gun in the US.
here are the latest stats: 2013
Motor vehicle traffic deaths
Number of deaths: 33,804
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.7
All firearm deaths
Number of deaths: 33,636
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.6
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm (pretty close to a dead heat)
the cdc doesn't actually study gun deaths so there's no way to evaluate the effect of gun bans. It would not surprise me one bit if they don't work. Obama ordered them to look into it but nothing happened so the pressure must be from the gun lobby side....hmmm
-
Stroke / Nervedamage?
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/140f2acb0e03e7bfb9448af269755e2596a8b2d4/362_294_2181_1308/master/2181.jpg?w=1225&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=d13e2cc208d99eb7c58e1e58f2f3e1f6)
-
#tarpman
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYApF2iU0AEDj2d.jpg)
-
here are the latest stats: 2013
Motor vehicle traffic deaths
Number of deaths: 33,804
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.7
All firearm deaths
Number of deaths: 33,636
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.6
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm (pretty close to a dead heat)
the cdc doesn't actually study gun deaths so there's no way to evaluate the effect of gun bans. It would not surprise me one bit if they don't work. Obama ordered them to look into it but nothing happened so the pressure must be from the gun lobby side....hmmm
OK so guns are no more dangerous than cars ;)
-
For reasons known best to you (and you will doubtless reveal more of them than what you have to date) you are a miserable sod and as the old saying goes, misery enjoys company.
Near as one can tell, no one invited you to this party.
Ridiculous.
Says Getbig's Pollyanna.
-
Ok... Seriously. This has been going on for what, 4 days now?
It's just time to end this nonsense.
Does the Federal Government believe they will just starve them out?
At this point, it's time to do something.
My opinion has changed to "freeze them out".
Whatever window existed to resolve the situation in a manner that pretended non-whites would have similar treatment has closed.
At this point, escalating to violence would only make the next group of whackos more resolute and endanger law enforcement lives. They'd also be considered martyrs by a the like-minded.
-
profiles of this fine getbigger, a Marine known for his staunch opposition to "radical islam" are all over the web:
(http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/568d20f2e6183e3f798b5523-743-557/screen%20shot%202016-01-06%20at%209.12.10%20am.png)
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-fbi-has-been-tracking-an-unhinged-anti-muslim-activist-oregon-protester-for-months-2016-1
turns out the FBI has been tracking him
-
daddy's a getbigger too
“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids — and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch — they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.
“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2014/04/24/cliven-bundys-outrageous-comments-about-the-negro/
-
Has muscularny posted lately?
-
My opinion has changed to "freeze them out".
Whatever window existed to resolve the situation in a manner that pretended non-whites would have similar treatment has closed.
At this point, escalating to violence would only make the next group of whackos more resolute and endanger law enforcement lives. They'd also be considered martyrs by a the like-minded.
I have to agree.
If they were black, it certainly wouldn't have been allowed to go on this long.
-
Yes Tim all the violence stopped after Port Arthur , well at least the gun violence , Oh wait
calfzilla said "I could just sit back and watch the carnage and say 'told you so'" after guns are banned.
so I said: kind of like what happened in Australia. Crime or other carnage did not go up after guns were banned in Australia.
but let me throw this out. The rate of suicide is much higher when there is a gun in the house.
and this: Children in the U.S. are 18 times more likely to be murdered with a gun than children in other developed countries. - Harvard Public Health
-
calfzilla said "I could just sit back and watch the carnage and say 'told you so'" after guns are banned.
so I said: kind of like what happened in Australia. Crime or other carnage did not go up after guns were banned in Australia.
but let me throw this out. The rate of suicide is much higher when there is a gun in the house.
and this: Children in the U.S. are 18 times more likely to be murdered with a gun than children in other developed countries. - Harvard Public Health
Just catching the last page of this thread but are you saying that guns should be banned and people shouldn't have them? Simple yes or no.
-
Just catching the last page of this thread but are you saying that guns should be banned and people shouldn't have them? Simple yes or no.
No, prohibition never works. They should be very difficult to obtain, keep, and use. Wait times, background checks (including mental health), smart locks, limits on ammunition. No open carry. Repeal Stand Your Ground laws.
-
No, prohibition never works. They should be very difficult to obtain, keep, and use. Wait times, background checks (including mental health), smart locks, limits on ammunition. No open carry. Repeal Stand Your Ground laws.
Why? Because you don't like guns? See this is what I love about the left:
Me: You don't want a gun, don't buy one
You: No one can have a gun, or impose a bunch of restrictions
-
Says Getbig's Pollyanna.
Let me guess...You're mangina is experiencing heavier than normal levels of flow.
Run along now, Curious George.
-
No, prohibition never works. They should be very difficult to obtain, keep, and use. Wait times, background checks (including mental health), smart locks, limits on ammunition. No open carry. Repeal Stand Your Ground laws.
Mmmm, so if someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night and walks into mine or my kids room, I don't have the right to protect them?
-
Why? Because you don't like guns? See this is what I love about the left:
Me: You don't want a gun, don't buy one
You: No one can have a gun, or impose a bunch of restrictions
They do use that in regards to gay marriage.
Don't want a gay marriage... Don't get one.
Same thing can apply for guns.
-
on this thread, on getbig...
at some point, the people defending them are just going to get quiet, stop posting. Happens a lot.
aj? Kazan? Coach? Talking about guns but not about the occupiers, huh? ;)
it's awful quiet. What about the 150 patriotic heroes rescuing the land from evil treacherous govt? Werre the liberals right that it was just a handful of spoiled, low IQ, or just plain crazy jerks who did it for money purposes?
-
Why? Because you don't like guns? See this is what I love about the left:
Me: You don't want a gun, don't buy one
You: No one can have a gun, or impose a bunch of restrictions
Public health issue. You're ok with restrictions on smoking, drinking. Ok with requiring a script from a doctor for prescription drugs. You're ok with restrictions on driving, flying a plane. On and on.
You want to keep your guns to protect you from the government? Ask a Yemeni wedding party how that's working out.
-
aj? Kazan? Coach? Talking about guns but not about the occupiers, huh? ;)
it's awful quiet. What about the 150 patriotic heroes rescuing the land from evil treacherous govt? Werre the liberals right that it was just a handful of spoiled, low IQ, or just plain crazy jerks who did it for money purposes?
I just don't like you and this will be the last time I respond to one of your posts
-
Mmmm, so if someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night and walks into mine or my kids room, I don't have the right to protect them?
No, you May Destroy Them.
-
Mmmm, so if someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night and walks into mine or my kids room, I don't have the right to protect them?
that is not Stand Your Ground. Such action was considered justifiable long before Stand Your Ground laws became popular.
But the odds of you having to defend yourself from an intruder is much lower than the odds of you or your kid committing suicide with your gun, or of accidentally shooting someone else, or of you accidentally shooting your kid thinking they're an intruder.
Instead call The Monitoring Center, Switching Is Easy, 18662474999
-
Public health issue. You're ok with restrictions on smoking, drinking. Ok with requiring a script from a doctor for prescription drugs. You're ok with restrictions on driving, flying a plane. On and on.
You want to keep your guns to protect you from the government? Ask a Yemeni wedding party how that's working out.
I am? Just so we understand each other here, the right to bear arms is a natural right, a constitutional right - smoking, drinking, driving or flying a plane are not a constitutional rights. There for those issues are dealt with by the state per the 10th amendment. I assume you people have managed to graduate the 8th grade? I had to pass a constitution test to move on to high school.
-
Public health issue. You're ok with restrictions on smoking, drinking. Ok with requiring a script from a doctor for prescription drugs. You're ok with restrictions on driving, flying a plane. On and on.
You want to keep your guns to protect you from the government? Ask a Yemeni wedding party how that's working out.
There needs to be a law that says you must wear a condom for any and all male involved sexual relations including heterosexual, homosexual and masturbation. The Feds can bust your door down to make certain you're obeying this law. Only condoms can save the world from STDs. Don't like it? Too bad.
Let the battle cry be sounded. Penises kill.
And don't go telling us all about your right to the "pursuit of fappiness", kid.
Yeah...This is what you sound like to a reasonable human being.
-
I have to agree.
If they were black, it certainly wouldn't have been allowed to go on this long.
How do we know? Honestly when was the last time a group of blacks protested in this manner?
-
I am? Just so we understand each other here, the right to bear arms is a natural right, a constitutional right
If the purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect us from a tyrannical government, then your little assault weapons won't be enough. Why are you not fighting for the right to bear surface to air missiles ? That is the only thing that might be able to protect you from the government's flying killer robots.
-
How do we know? Honestly when was the last time a group of blacks protested in this manner?
I suppose the memory of Waco doesn't influence Tim the Enchanter's (and several others here) thoughts regarding this. No one wants another Waco except perhaps a wacko.
-
How do we know? Honestly when was the last time a group of blacks protested in this manner?
I mean, it's been awhile, and I will admit I can not "prove" the hypothesis. Do you honestly believe that a group of black armed people would be allowed to take over a building and sit it out for 4 days?
Honestly.
Fuck man... I can't imagine ME being able to do this, and no one would sit around and say I look like a "thug".
So I really don't get how these guys are able to do so.
-
If the purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect us from a tyrannical government, then your little assault weapons won't be enough. Why are you not fighting for the right to bear surface to air missiles ? That is the only thing that might be able to protect you from the government's flying killer robots.
You are not only stupid, but desperately so.
-
You are not only stupid, but desperately so.
I mean, didnt the goverment ban uzis and machine guns? How were they able to do that? Why cant a law abiding citizen own a machine or uzi? If youre a law abiding citizen, shouldn't it be your right to own any gun you want? Why is the government allowed to restrict what gun you own?
-
calfzilla said "I could just sit back and watch the carnage and say 'told you so'" after guns are banned.
so I said: kind of like what happened in Australia. Crime or other carnage did not go up after guns were banned in Australia.
but let me throw this out. The rate of suicide is much higher when there is a gun in the house.
and this: Children in the U.S. are 18 times more likely to be murdered with a gun than children in other developed countries. - Harvard Public Health
the major barrier to making convincing argument is the lack of data.
http://www.wired.com/2015/10/america-still-doesnt-good-data-guns/
a comparison with Canada:
When looking at firearm-related homicide rates in comparable countries, Canada’s rate is about seven times lower than that of the United States (3.5 per 100,000 population), although it is higher than several other peer countries. While Canada’s firearm-related homicide rate is similar to those in Ireland and Switzerland, it is significantly higher than the rates in Japan (0.01 per 100,000 population) and the United Kingdom (0.06 per 100,000 population),”
http://www.nationalobserver.com/2015/12/04/news/how-american-gun-deaths-and-gun-laws-compare-canadas
-
I mean, didnt the goverment ban uzis and machine guns? How were they able to do that? Why cant a law abiding citizen own a machine or uzi? If youre a law abiding citizen, shouldn't it be your right to own any gun you want? Why is the government allowed to restrict what gun you own?
I think it should be.
That's just me.
I feel what is good for the government is good for me.
-
If the purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect us from a tyrannical government, then your little assault weapons won't be enough. Why are you not fighting for the right to bear surface to air missiles ? That is the only thing that might be able to protect you from the government's flying killer robots.
I am of the mind that citizens should have access to the same weapons as the military, per the 2nd amendment. You ever stop to think that the reason there isn't a tyrannical government is because citizens are armed? From 1791 until 1934 there were not restrictions on what citizens could have or where they could carry arms.
-
How do we know? Honestly when was the last time a group of blacks protested in this manner?
fireworks start about 2:00 mins in
-
I mean, didnt the goverment ban uzis and machine guns? How were they able to do that? Why cant a law abiding citizen own a machine or uzi? If youre a law abiding citizen, shouldn't it be your right to own any gun you want? Why is the government allowed to restrict what gun you own?
I don't own a gun. And no, they(the government) shouldn't be able to do so. If we are to posit the ridiculous as sane then my post on dealing with health issues caused by the evil penis should pave the way for multiple (because one is never enough) laws to prevent illness and death by penis.
Why can't the government legislate from the bedroom to the back seat to the bathroom stall? Its for the children, dammit! Do you have a permit for that penis?! Is it mating season?! Is that a Derringer in your pocket or is it cold in here?
I am simply demonstrating the ridiculous by being more so. Tim is ridiculous.
-
fireworks start about 2:00 mins in
The problem with this is they fired on the police first.
-
I suppose the memory of Waco doesn't influence Tim the Enchanter's (and several others here) thoughts regarding this. No one wants another Waco except perhaps a wacko.
You state these generalities about me, yet it is clear you haven't read what I've written in this thread. I've stated many time above that my starting this thread is to point out the hypocrisy of how the media and government is dealing with this, that if the group hadn't been white, they wouldn't have lived to see the next day. I gave examples of how non-white protestors have been dealt with, from the deadly MOVE incident in Philadelphia, to just locking up all the toilets during OWS protests. I said that the best thing to do this time is turn off the electricity and wait them out.
-
I mean, didnt the goverment ban uzis and machine guns? How were they able to do that? Why cant a law abiding citizen own a machine or uzi? If youre a law abiding citizen, shouldn't it be your right to own any gun you want? Why is the government allowed to restrict what gun you own?
No. You can still buy uzis. And what is a "machine gun"?
I mean, it's been awhile, and I will admit I can not "prove" the hypothesis. Do you honestly believe that a group of black armed people would be allowed to take over a building and sit it out for 4 days?
Honestly.
Fuck man... I can't imagine ME being able to do this, and no one would sit around and say I look like a "thug".
So I really don't get how these guys are able to do so.
I think if it was the same exact circumstances, only changing skin color, you'd be watching the same thing unfold. But unless the black community organizes and attempts something like this, we'll never know.
-
The problem with this is they fired on the police first.
what do you think these gentlemen would do if they were tear gassed?
-
that is not Stand Your Ground. Such action was considered justifiable long before Stand Your Ground laws became popular.
But the odds of you having to defend yourself from an intruder is much lower than the odds of you or your kid committing suicide with your gun, or of accidentally shooting someone else, or of you accidentally shooting your kid thinking they're an intruder.
Instead call The Monitoring Center, Switching Is Easy, 18662474999
Here's how a normal person thinks Tim and it's as simple as this. If someone breaks into my home and threatens my family or just flat out breaks into my home it's a natural instinct to protect them with a gun, with a cannon, with a fucking rocket launcher, with a bat , a knife a slingshot or whatever I can get my hands on to, again, protect my loved ones I'm going to do it despite any law. I wouldn't give a fuck if it were stand your ground or otherwise. Like MOST, if someone breaks in they should know they're not walking out.
-
No. You can still buy uzis. And what is a "machine gun"?
I think if it was the same exact circumstances, only changing skin color, you'd be watching the same thing unfold. But unless the black community organizes and attempts something like this, we'll never know.
I would like to find out.
Remember, these are the same people who pointed armed weapons at Feds in 2014 and there were no shots fired.
Do you also believe that would be the same? Numerous black men pointing firearms at federal law enforcement would not shot at?
-
You state these generalities about me, yet it is clear you haven't read what I've written in this thread. I've stated many time above that my starting this thread is to point out the hypocrisy of how the media and government is dealing with this, that if the group hadn't been white, they wouldn't have lived to see the next day. I gave examples of how non-white protestors have been dealt with, from the deadly MOVE incident in Philadelphia, to just locking up all the toilets during OWS protests. I said that the best thing to do this time is turn off the electricity and wait them out.
Trust me, I've read your words. I just happen to disagree with many of them. Law abiding citizens are not the source of the problem and the government does not have the right to take away their Constitutionally guaranteed rights as written by the Founding Fathers not the fondling fathers.
Don't like guns? Don't own one. Don't like guns being owned by good, decent law abiding Americans. Too bad. Don't like guns being used in crime? Try asking for justice, not just us.
And unless you are a total imbecile you know exactly what I am saying.
-
You ever stop to think that the reason there isn't a tyrannical government is because citizens are armed?
No. there are many forms of tyranny. Look at the early history of coal mining. Lots of tyranny there. They (citizens) tried using guns there, didn't work. It took organized labor to break the tyranny.
From 1791 until 1934 there were not restrictions on what citizens could have or where they could carry arms.
the problem is weapons have become too efficient. Pretty much anyone can create or obtain weapons of mass destruction, and, with biotech, it's only going to get worse.
-
Here's how a normal person thinks Tim and it's as simple as this. If someone breaks into my home and threatens my family or just flat out breaks into my home it's a natural instinct to protect them with a gun, with a cannon, with a fucking rocket launcher, with a bat , a knife a slingshot or whatever I can get my hands on to, again, protect my loved ones I'm going to do it despite any law. I wouldn't give a fuck if it were stand your ground or otherwise. Like MOST, if someone breaks in they should know they're not walking out.
as was stated before, protecting your home from an intruder is not what Stand Your Ground laws are about. Protecting your home from an intruder was justifiable long before Stand Your Ground laws became popular. (BTW, no Stand Your Ground laws in California, but we do have Castle Doctrine.)
But a normal person should think that if the chances of needing to protect my children from an intruder is X, and the chances of my children getting hurt or killed from the thing I use to protect my children from an intruder is Y, and Y is much greater than X, I probably should find another way to protect my children from the unlikely chance of an intruder. 1 866 24 7 4 9 99
-
I would like to find out.
Remember, these are the same people who pointed armed weapons at Feds in 2014 and there were no shots fired.
Do you also believe that would be the same? Numerous black men pointing firearms at federal law enforcement would not shot at?
a young lad in a playground by himself answered that question a few years ago
-
You state these generalities about me, yet it is clear you haven't read what I've written in this thread. I've stated many time above that my starting this thread is to point out the hypocrisy of how the media and government is dealing with this, that if the group hadn't been white, they wouldn't have lived to see the next day. I gave examples of how non-white protestors have been dealt with, from the deadly MOVE incident in Philadelphia, to just locking up all the toilets during OWS protests. I said that the best thing to do this time is turn off the electricity and wait them out.
Again Tim NOT accurate
And MOVE fired at police first
-
Again Tim NOT accurate
And MOVE fired at police first
Marching..........not the same as taking over FEDERAL PROPERTY
-
Public health issue. You're ok with restrictions on smoking, drinking. Ok with requiring a script from a doctor for prescription drugs. You're ok with restrictions on driving, flying a plane. On and on.
You want to keep your guns to protect you from the government? Ask a Yemeni wedding party how that's working out.
None of them are rights, and there are already restrictions on firearms.
A handful of Vietnamese peasants with rudimentary bombs and Mosins and AK's held off the mighty American war machine for 10+ years , just imagine what a 100 million Americans would do with 300 million private firearms
-
Marching..........not the same as taking over FEDERAL PROPERTY
Yes , but the point stands armed black men and women open carrying and not one of them killed for it. Exercising their 2nd amendment rights in front of a police station.
Tim is acting like if they were black they'd be gunned down , not true.
-
Yes , but the point stands armed black men and women open carrying and not one of them killed for it. Exercising their 2nd amendment rights in front of a police station.
Tim is acting like if they were black they'd be gunned down , not true.
what about that youn lad in the playground a few years ago?
-
No. there are many forms of tyranny. Look at the early history of coal mining. Lots of tyranny there. They (citizens) tried using guns there, didn't work. It took organized labor to break the tyranny.
the problem is weapons have become too efficient. Pretty much anyone can create or obtain weapons of mass destruction, and, with biotech, it's only going to get worse.
You are off track, the government wasn't running coal mines.
Dude you could buy a tommy gun from the sears catalog prior to 1934. Don't try to tell me about how much more efficient weapons are now. A tommy gun was a fully automatic .45 cal weapon. It is one of the most stable hand held fully automatic platforms. Then came the NFA to ban "gangster guns". Your real fear is of people not guns, and you are under the illusion if people do not have access to guns, suddenly they are going to act like upstanding citizens
-
If the purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect us from a tyrannical government, then your little assault weapons won't be enough. Why are you not fighting for the right to bear surface to air missiles ? That is the only thing that might be able to protect you from the government's flying killer robots.
Ask the Vietnamese , ask the Afghans , and ask the Iraqis, they would beg to differ. Know your history.
-
Ask the Vietnamese , ask the Afghans , and ask the Iraqis, they would beg to differ. Know your history.
haha these countries have all been uttery destroyed! come on man you can do better this! :D
only in the US will you read this shit. post of the year!
-
what about that youn lad in the playground a few years ago?
Tamir Rice. bad situation all around. I personally feel the kid shouldn't have been shot but I could see how they mistook his " toy " for a real gun. I think the cops overreacted but the kid removed the orange plug out the barrel and was pointed it at people in the park , a lot of failure on all ends. The cops shouldn't have just rolled up on him like that either
I think this picture says a lot
-
haha these countries have all been uttery destroyed! come on man you can do better this! :D
only in the US will you read this shit. post of the year!
You think your dismissive post proves that these peasants with basic firearms didn't hold off the American war machine for years? Keep trying kid.
-
Tamir Rice. bad situation all around. I personally feel the kid shouldn't have been shot but I could see how they mistook his " toy " for a real gun. I think the cops overreacted but the kid removed the orange plug out the barrel and was pointed it at people in the park , a lot of failure on all ends. The cops shouldn't have just rolled up on him like that either
I think this picture says a lot
it may be a bad case all round but he wasnt given even four hours let alone 4 days and the depth of ambiguity around the case is perverse
-
I always thought there was a ban on automatic weapons. Is this correct?
-
Tamir Rice. bad situation all around. I personally feel the kid shouldn't have been shot but I could see how they mistook his " toy " for a real gun. I think the cops overreacted but the kid removed the orange plug out the barrel and was pointed it at people in the park , a lot of failure on all ends. The cops shouldn't have just rolled up on him like that either
I think this picture says a lot
You make a good point that I think has been overlooked......How the cops rolled up on Tamir Rice is to me an indication that they KNEW he was just a kid...they rolled up very close to him showing absolutely no fear.....if he were an adult I sincerely doubt they would have come up so close to him
-
You think your dismissive post proves that these peasants with basic firearms didn't hold off the American war machine for years? Keep trying kid.
look as much as I admire your work on other matters. you're off base here.
please remain open to new sources of information with regard to this subject! ;)
-
I always thought there was a ban on automatic weapons. Is this correct?
No , hell you could mail order them back in the day. They still aren't " banned " you can get them but they are so cost prohibitive that most can't afford them. a NFA full auto M16 will cost you about $20K a semi-automatic AR15 can be had for about $600
-
You think your dismissive post proves that these peasants with basic firearms didn't hold off the American war machine for years? Keep trying kid.
Times have changed.
Average American
(http://cdn.redmondpie.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/gamer.jpg)
-
Times have changed.
Average American
(http://cdn.redmondpie.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/gamer.jpg)
Agreed...this guy doesn't have a drop of Testosterone in him
-
Times have changed.
Average American
Fucking Millennials ::)
-
No , hell you could mail order them back in the day. They still aren't " banned " you can get them but they are so cost prohibitive that most can't afford them. a NFA full auto M16 will cost you about $20K a semi-automatic AR15 can be had for about $600
From google:
"Machine guns are not illegal, but it is illegal to make and register new ones on a form 1 (as you would do for an SBR) There is no way around the May 19th, 1986 date. If the machine gun in question was made after that date, you may not own it (unless you are a dealer)May 21, 2014."
Can you explain what this means, especially the part where it says, "you may not own it (unless you are a dealer)." But isnt the point of being a dealer is to sell?
-
$25K :-X
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=535202158
-
Fucking Millennials ::)
Eventually, when the old school people die off, we will be left with this. Good luck getting him to defend against a tyrannical government.
(http://img.suggest.com/slides/2/4/7/9/4/5/2479454050/d9a6cc25f9b6da585f5c87cabe20384b25080d1e.jpeg)
-
From google:
"Machine guns are not illegal, but it is illegal to make and register new ones on a form 1 (as you would do for an SBR) There is no way around the May 19th, 1986 date. If the machine gun in question was made after that date, you may not own it (unless you are a dealer)May 21, 2014."
Can you explain what this means, especially the part where it says, "you may not own it (unless you are a dealer)." But isnt the point of being a dealer is to sell?
You can make brand new full auto guns if you're a dealer/manufacturer but transferring them is a no-no.
-
.
-
You can make brand new full auto guns if you're a dealer/manufacturer but transferring them is a no-no.
Gotcha. Thanks.
I was always under the assumption that automatic weapons were banned.
Machine gun for $1450.00
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=535578188#PIC
-
You are off track, the government wasn't running coal mines.
in company towns, the companies were the government. and the federal government backed them up with the national guard
Your real fear is of people not guns, and you are under the illusion if people do not have access to guns, suddenly they are going to act like upstanding citizens
and many gun owners fears is not the government, but minorities and other "them"
-
in company towns, the companies were the government. and the federal government backed them up with the national guard
and many gun owners fears is not the government, but minorities and other "them"
Ever heard of Posse Comitatus Act?
And it doesn't matter the 2nd amendment is still in the constitution, and as long as it is, people have the right to bear arms.
-
You can make brand new full auto guns if you're a dealer/manufacturer but transferring them is a no-no.
Correct.
That's one of the things about the AR-15.
You can make it full auto without too much trouble.
-
and many gun owners fears is not the government, but minorities and other "them"
Arbiter of truth...tell me more ::) stop projecting what you think " many gun owners fear " I have no fear of a legal person owning a gun and " minorities " can get them illegally or legally , your argument holds no water.
-
Correct.
That's one of the things about the AR-15.
You can make it full auto without too much trouble.
Or close to with a bump-fire or binary trigger
-
Or close to with a bump-fire or binary trigger
True.
Even without it, we're talking about way more rounds per minute than I will need.
It's a great weapon.
-
You think your dismissive post proves that these peasants with basic firearms didn't hold off the American war machine for years? Keep trying kid.
The countries were all destroyed militarily, millions of people died. Is this in dispute? The political "victories" (NOT MILITARY) are Vietnam turned communist, while Iraq and Afghanistan are now ruled by religious fanatics. So let me know how the guns fit into this fairytale scenario... ???
-
The countries were all destroyed militarily, millions of people died. Is this in dispute? The political "victories" (NOT MILITARY) are Vietnam turned communist, while Iraq and Afghanistan are now ruled by religious fanatics. So let me know how the guns fit into this fairytale scenario... ???
Irrelevant , people who claim U.S citizens wouldn't stand a chance against the military are ignorant.
-
Irrelevant , people who claim U.S citizens wouldn't stand a chance against the military are ignorant.
You've heard of drones, tanks and Jet fighters correct? The US military could glass a whole neighborhood with one drone strike. You wouldn't see an actual soldier until all of the airstrikes took out all key buildings and infrastructure. This is not Call of Duty where you walk around shooting people.
-
Irrelevant , people who claim U.S citizens wouldn't stand a chance against the military are ignorant.
why do you think this!?
-
You've heard of drones, tanks and Jet fighters correct? The US military could glass a whole neighborhood with one drone strike. You wouldn't see an actual soldier until all of the airstrikes took out all key buildings and infrastructure. This is not Call of Duty where you walk around shooting people.
Destroying a neighborhood like that would only cause all 300 million people in the US to take action.
While they do have advanced weaponry, in the end, they would lose.
People of the land will never quit, that's the reason why the Soviets couldn't win in Afghanistan and the US can't continue to stay in Iraq.
-
You've heard of drones, tanks and Jet fighters correct? The US military could glass a whole neighborhood with one drone strike. You wouldn't see an actual soldier until all of the airstrikes took out all key buildings and infrastructure. This is not Call of Duty where you walk around shooting people.
The question is: Would the military take up arms against the citizen? Or would the military join "our" side? Same thing with cops.
-
Destroying a neighborhood like that would only cause all 300 million people in the US to take action.
While they do have advanced weaponry, in the end, they would lose.
People of the land will never quit, that's the reason why the Soviets couldn't win in Afghanistan and the US can't continue to stay in Iraq.
300 million take action? There are 321,000,000 million people in the United States (according to 2015 stats). How do you figure 300 million people? Once you exclude the disabled, the elderly, woman, and children, how many people are you left with to fight? A LOT less than 3 million. Just alone, almost 50 million people in the Unites States suffer from disabilities. There were more than 73 million children under age 18 in the United States in 2008. Nearly one-third (21 million) were under age five. The older population—persons 65 years or older—numbered 44.7 million in 2013. There were over 158.6 million women in the United States in 2009.
-
You've heard of drones, tanks and Jet fighters correct? The US military could glass a whole neighborhood with one drone strike. You wouldn't see an actual soldier until all of the airstrikes took out all key buildings and infrastructure. This is not Call of Duty where you walk around shooting people.
They had all of that with the exception of drones in Vietnam , they fared much better than anticipated. Drones are devastating though but you think the U.S government is going to deploy them here? Highly doubtful. I don't play C.O.D never have , never will.
Hundreds of thousands of ex military own firearms keep that in mind. Battle hardened vets who swore an oath to protect the constitution from enemies foreign & domestic. If .Gov tries to confiscate people's guns it will be Civil war 2.0
-
Destroying a neighborhood like that would only cause all 300 million people in the US to take action.
While they do have advanced weaponry, in the end, they would lose.
People of the land will never quit, that's the reason why the Soviets couldn't win in Afghanistan and the US can't continue to stay in Iraq.
out of those 300 million about 90% are sheep and would do what they're told. blacks, latinos and whites would turn on each other. solidarity is a pipe dream
-
300 million take action? There are 321,000,000 million people in the United States (according to 2015 stats). How do you figure 300 million people? Once you exclude the disabled, the elderly, woman, and children, how many people are you left with to fight? A LOT less than 3 million. Just alone, almost 50 million people in the Unites States suffer from disabilities.
So you're saying 150 Million? 100?
I'm overstating of course, but we know there are over 300 million weapons and a populace extremely happy to use them.
China has made statements that even with their large armies, they can not compete with the US citizens in regards to armament.
-
So you're saying 150 Million? 100?
I'm overstating of course, but we know there are over 300 million weapons and a populace extremely happy to use them.
China has made statements that even with their large armies, they can not compete with the US citizens in regards to armament.
Some more statistics:
There were more than 73 million children under age 18 in the United States in 2008. Nearly one-third (21 million) were under age five. The older population—persons 65 years or older—numbered 44.7 million in 2013. There were over 158.6 million women in the United States in 2009.
So, probably even less than 100 million. And when you take into consider the current generation, WAY less than 100 million.
-
300 million take action? There are 321,000,000 million people in the United States (according to 2015 stats). How do you figure 300 million people? Once you exclude the disabled, the elderly, woman, and children, how many people are you left with to fight? A LOT less than 3 million. Just alone, almost 50 million people in the Unites States suffer from disabilities. There were more than 73 million children under age 18 in the United States in 2008. Nearly one-third (21 million) were under age five. The older population—persons 65 years or older—numbered 44.7 million in 2013. There were over 158.6 million women in the United States in 2009.
More than one-third (34.9% or 78.6 million) of U.S. adults are obese.
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html
-
Some more statistics:
There were more than 73 million children under age 18 in the United States in 2008. Nearly one-third (21 million) were under age five. The older population—persons 65 years or older—numbered 44.7 million in 2013. There were over 158.6 million women in the United States in 2009.
So, probably even less than 100 million. And when you take into consider the current generation, WAY less than 100 million.
"Children" in Afghanistan around age 12 are shooting AKs.
People of 60 are still out shooting big guns.
I think you are being overly harsh on the young and old in regards to what they are capable of.
-
They had all of that with the exception of drones in Vietnam , they fared much better than anticipated. Drones are devastating though but you think the U.S government is going to deploy them here? Highly doubtful. I don't play C.O.D never have , never will.
Hundreds of thousands of ex military own firearms keep that in mind. Battle hardened vets who swore an oath to protect the constitution from enemies foreign & domestic. If .Gov tries to confiscate people's guns it will be Civil war 2.0
You seem to be thinking of a war against broad land like Texas. Let's pick big metro areas. What would happen in NYC if all food, water and power were cut off? Do you think they'd band together to fight the gov? They would turn on each other in an instant. The Gov could sit back and watch the chaos ensue and let the people do the work for them. Sure it would be harder to go after militia groups in rural areas, but that's what drones are for.
-
More than one-third (34.9% or 78.6 million) of U.S. adults are obese.
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html
Exactly. An obese person in war would only be good for driving a tank, but since the average citizen doesn't own a tank, well, they would be killed in a matter of seconds in war.
-
Exactly. An obese person in war would only be good for driving a tank, but since the average citizen doesn't own a tank, well, they would be killed in a matter of seconds in war.
The obesity statements are not valid though.
People who are perfectly fit are listed as obese according to the US standards.
There are numerous people in the military that would technically be considered "Obese" because of their muscle mass.
-
They had all of that with the exception of drones in Vietnam , they fared much better than anticipated. Drones are devastating though but you think the U.S government is going to deploy them here? Highly doubtful. I don't play C.O.D never have , never will.
Hundreds of thousands of ex military own firearms keep that in mind. Battle hardened vets who swore an oath to protect the constitution from enemies foreign & domestic. If .Gov tries to confiscate people's guns it will be Civil war 2.0
Vietnam was foreign soil. They didn't control anything there. They didn't have bases setup everywhere like they do here. They have full control of this country, they didn't have any in Vietnam.
-
Exactly. An obese person in war would only be good for driving a tank, but since the average citizen doesn't own a tank, well, they would be killed in a matter of seconds in war.
Have you seen the opening of a tank or been inside one? An Obese person wouldn't even get their head through the opening.
-
I learn something new everyday. I'm open to new information.
Perhaps it was the guns in the hands of the Iraqi populace that defeated the mighty US war machine!
As a part of furthering my gun expert status, I'll have to look into this further.
-
Vietnam was foreign soil. They didn't control anything there. They didn't have bases setup everywhere like they do here. They have full control of this country, they didn't have any in Vietnam.
Good points , but the point stands. How many on the bases would open fire on fellow Americans because .Gov decided to unconstitutionally ban firearms? provocative questions no doubt but even if the minority of gun owners fought back let's say 10% that's 10 million armed citizens that poses a MAJOR problem for anyone. It wouldn't be a lopsided massacre in their favor.
That's how this country got started , a bunch of tax evading " terrorist " rebels going against the mightiest military force on the planet.
-
"Children" in Afghanistan around age 12 are shooting AKs.
People of 60 are still out shooting big guns.
I think you are being overly harsh on the young and old in regards to what they are capable of.
Yes, but the children in the Middle East have been handling a gun since they were 3. The average American kid has not. HUGE difference in cultures.
Or I am being realistic? Fact of the matter is, most people 65+ and most kids, say, below the ages of 17, wont take arms. Most women will not either.
Your 300 million is a FAR cry from accurate. Even if some elderly people and kids decided to take up arms, it will still will be below 300 million. Hell, the 50 million disabled people already knocks it down to around the 250 million mark, depending what their disability is. Heck, this probably doesn't even include all the people with chronic medical conditions.
I think you're being to generous in terms of who would take up arms against the government.
-
Have you seen the opening of a tank or been inside one? An Obese person wouldn't even get their head through the opening.
Touche!
-
Good points , but the point stands. How many on the bases would open fire on fellow Americans because .Gov decided to unconstitutionally ban firearms? provocative questions no doubt but even if the minority of gun owners fought back let's say 10% that's 10 million armed citizens that poses a MAJOR problem for anyone. It wouldn't be a lopsided massacre in their favor.
That's how this country got started , a bunch of tax evading " terrorist " rebels going against the mightiest military force on the planet.
Anyone who says "the gun owners" haven't a chance are just the people who wouldn't do anything. It's fine, because maybe that's who they are, but in reality, 10 Million people would be huge and if it was closer to 30 or 40 million... Forget it.
What is the .gov going to do? Nuke the entire country? That would serve no purpose at all.
-
Anyone who says "the gun owners" haven't a chance are just the people who wouldn't do anything. It's fine, because maybe that's who they are, but in reality, 10 Million people would be huge and if it was closer to 30 or 40 million... Forget it.
What is the .gov going to do? Nuke the entire country? That would serve no purpose at all.
In sheer numbers of alone, obviously 40 million citizens would beat the american military, which is about 1.5 million people.
But it really depends what the government is willing to do and how they are willing to fight back. If they take a gung-ho approach and break out air strikes and all that crap, well, that could easily even the playing field.
-
In sheer numbers of alone, obviously 40 million citizens would beat the american military, which is about 1.5 million people.
But it really depends what the government is willing to do and how they are willing to fight back. If they take a gung-ho approach and break out air strikes and all that crap, well, that could easily even the playing field.
Possibly, but how many Isis people have been scaring the shit out of the US and apparently taking over whatever they want?
35K? 50K? 150K?
-
Possibly, but how many Isis people have been scaring the shit out of the US and apparently taking over whatever they want?
35K? 50K? 150K?
ISIS are savages, most Americans are not. The reasons we are scared of ISIS is because of their savagery. It has little to do with their numbers (high or low). Even if America did take up arms against the government, most of us are not savages. Sure we would protect our country, but we probably wouldnt be chopping peoples head off either. Then again, who knows.
-
The difference between Afganistan, Vietnam, etc., and an insurgent war within the US is that those foreign insurgents have arms manufacturers constantly resupplying them. In an insurgent war within the US, the ammo manufacturers would not be very willing or able to resupply the rebels.
-
The difference between Afganistan, Vietnam, etc., and an insurgent war within the US is that those foreign insurgents have arms manufacturers constantly resupplying them. In an insurgent war within the US, the ammo manufacturers would not be very willing or able to resupply the rebels.
I'm sure quite a few would.
Maybe not ever manufacturer, but many sure as hell would.
Plus we have have lots of already built weapons AND ability to create ammo.
-
I'm sure quite a few would.
Maybe not ever manufacturer, but many sure as hell would.
Plus we have have lots of already built weapons AND ability to create ammo.
But at what cost? Can the average American afford to buy thousands and thousands of rounds of ammo? If a war against the government is carrying on for a VERY long time, its hard to fight a war while going to your 9-5 job to earn a living. No job, no money to buy ammo. I mean, who would be supplying the average citizen with continuous ammo? Themselves? Or some other person?
-
The US has ruled the entire world for 50+ years using military power and continues to do so.
Somehow the civilian population, mostly untrained, is going to rise up and beat it.
I want to know how this is going to work.
with guns I guess?
???
-
Maybe not ever manufacturer, but many sure as hell would.
and the military takes over those factories. Then what?
Plus we have have lots of already built weapons AND ability to create ammo.
do you realize how much ammo is used in a war? say some foreign manufacturer is willing to supply the rebels. First they won't do it for free. How are the rebels going to pay them? Second it is a lot easier to sneak arms into Afganistan or Syria than Texas or Oregon
-
But at what cost? Can the average American afford to buy thousands and thousands of rounds of ammo? If a war against the government is carrying on for a VERY long time, its hard to fight a war while going to your 9-5 job to earn a living. No job, no money to buy ammo. I mean, who would be supplying the average citizen with continuous ammo? Themselves? Or some other person?
It would be like any other war.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
The insurgency would make an alliance with another country. Just like in The Revolutionary war and the beginning of the Civil War as well.
This is what war creates.
and the military takes over those factories. Then what?
do you realize how much ammo is used in a war? say some foreign manufacturer is willing to supply the rebels. First they won't do it for free. How are the rebels going to pay them? Second it is a lot easier to sneak arms into Afganistan or Syria than Texas or Oregon
See above.
-
It would be like any other war.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
The insurgency would make an alliance with another country. Just like in The Revolutionary war and the beginning of the Civil War as well.
This is what war creates.
See above.
Seems like you have a GRAND plan, but I don't think it would work out as you envision it. I really don't.
-
The insurgency would make an alliance with another country. Just like in The Revolutionary war and the beginning of the Civil War as well.
A foreign country would risk nuclear war with the US by supplying rebels in the US?
and again, how would they get the hundreds of tons of ammo to the rebels?
work stoppages and protest marches would have a much high chance of toppling a US government.
-
A foreign country would risk nuclear war with the US by supplying rebels in the US?
and again, how would they get the hundreds of tons of ammo to the rebels?
work stoppages and protest marches would have a much high chance of toppling a US government.
Why would they not? They do it now?!
The entire mess with ISIS and Syria is based upon this NOW!
-
Seems like you have a GRAND plan, but I don't think it would work out as you envision it. I really don't.
When my plan comes to fruition, I will not hold it against you.
-
Why would they not? They do it now?!
The entire mess with ISIS and Syria is based upon this NOW!
As I said, a lot easier to smuggle arms into these countries than it would be into the US
-
City Folk just don get it
-
The US has ruled the entire world for 50+ years using military power and continues to do so.
Somehow the civilian population, mostly untrained, is going to rise up and beat it.
I want to know how this is going to work.
with guns I guess?
???
All of the gun nuts will be used for target shooting thinking they're badass in their camo dockers and trucker hat.
-
All of the gun nuts will be used for target shooting thinking they're badass in their camo dockers and trucker hat.
Ultimate badasses, who would take out an entire Navy Seal team
(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1889045/thumbs/o-TARGET-570.jpg?1)
(http://www.rawstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Open-carry-Chipotle-even-via-Facebook-615x345.png)
-
As I said, a lot easier to smuggle arms into these countries than it would be into the US
Easier? possibly, but it could also be done without as much difficulty through Canada or Mexico if required.
Ultimate badasses, who would take out an entire Navy Seal team
(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1889045/thumbs/o-TARGET-570.jpg?1)
(http://www.rawstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Open-carry-Chipotle-even-via-Facebook-615x345.png)
How many though... A seal team going to take out 100 people? 1000?
This isn't a Rambo movie. A seal team is for a special op. They are not taking out hundreds of people.
-
Ultimate badasses, who would take out an entire Navy Seal team
(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1889045/thumbs/o-TARGET-570.jpg?1)
(http://www.rawstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Open-carry-Chipotle-even-via-Facebook-615x345.png)
Go read lone survivor and get back to me
-
The difference between Afganistan, Vietnam, etc., and an insurgent war within the US is that those foreign insurgents have arms manufacturers constantly resupplying them. In an insurgent war within the US, the ammo manufacturers would not be very willing or able to resupply the rebels.
300 million privately owned firearms in the United States and that's a conservative estimate. Who knows how much ammo people stockpile , ever hear of reloading? the same bullet casing can be used many times again. bullets are not hard to make either. You're getting all your info from Anti-gun resources among the most ignorant people on the subject.
Think about that number for a moment , 300 million privately owned firearms. Almost 1 for every American citizen.
-
300 million privately owned firearms in the United States and that's a conservative estimate. Who knows how much ammo people stockpile , ever hear of reloading? the same bullet casing can be used many times again. bullets are not hard to make either. You're getting all your info from Anti-gun resources among the most ignorant people on the subject.
Think about that number for a moment , 300 million privately owned firearms. Almost 1 for every American citizen.
Not to mention most people have AR's which shoot .556, same ammo the army uses.
-
Not to mention most people have AR's which shoot .556, same ammo the army uses.
And most people who stockpile weapons are stockpiling ammo too. I love people who don't have the faintest idea on guns talking about them lol I know PLENTY of ex military combat vets who aren't giving up their weapons anytime soon. This really is a moot point .Gov isn't going to face the armed American public they're much more subversive , backdoor policies , " common sense " bullshit , almost 100 years of infringing on people's Second Amendment rights and people are getting sick of it. Hey politicians are politicians they need to tow the party line.
-
you guys are so far divorced from reality I'm starting to think you should be disarmed.
-
you guys are so far divorced from reality I'm starting to think you should be disarmed.
lol Come and get them ;)
-
you guys are so far divorced from reality I'm starting to think you should be disarmed.
I'm sure that's what all of the non-doers say when they are dealing with tyrannical governments.
-
Personally, if you just got ND, Kazan and Tu Holmes together, they could probably take out the whole American military. I mean, they are getbiggers. :D :D :D :D :D
-
how long would all this stockpiled ammo last? a few weeks? So you reused the bullet casing, so what? how quickly can refill a few hundred? where will the powder come from?
The Vietnamese defeated the US, but it took about 10 years, and the Soviet Union was spending billions resupplying them.
OWS and BLM have a better chance of overthrowing those in power in the US through protests than do these white militia. That's why those in power crack down on them harder
-
the ultimate doer
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=137919.0;attach=154585;image)
-
Personally, if you just got ND, Kazan and Tu Holmes together, they could probably take out the whole American military. I mean, they are getniggers. :D :D :D :D :D
I guess we know what's in YOUR saved dictionary!
:o
-
how long would all this stockpiled ammo last? a few weeks? So you reused the bullet casing, so what? how quickly can refill a few hundred? where will the powder come from?
The Vietnamese defeated the US, but it took about 10 years, and the Soviet Union was spending billions resupplying them.
OWS and BLM have a better chance of overthrowing those in power in the US through protests than do these white militia. That's why those in power crack down on them harder
LMAO a few weeks? ::) Ammo can be made rather quickly. people stockpile powder as well. Why do you think every time the left threatens a " ban " these products disappear for months? You don't know what you're talking about because you're an outsider.
OWS and BLM have a better chance of overthrowing those in power in the US through protests than do these white militia. That's why those in power crack down on them harder
I don't agree with this " white militia " but I'm talking hypothetically if .Gov decided to try and confiscate law abiding citizen's guns. And neither of those organizations will be " overthrowing " those in power. They may be able to initiate social change but get serious.
-
lol
-
how long would all this stockpiled ammo last? a few weeks? So you reused the bullet casing, so what? how quickly can refill a few hundred? where will the powder come from?
The Vietnamese defeated the US, but it took about 10 years, and the Soviet Union was spending billions resupplying them.
OWS and BLM have a better chance of overthrowing those in power in the US through protests than do these white militia. That's why those in power crack down on them harder
Yes, wars take a long time and if you don't think someone would want to back the opposition of the current government, you haven't been paying attention to the world.
Someone is always willing to back your play.
-
Personally, if you just got ND, Kazan and Tu Holmes together, they could probably take out the whole American military. I mean, they are getniggers. :D :D :D :D :D
LOL!
-
Personally, if you just got ND, Kazan and Tu Holmes together, they could probably take out the whole American military. I mean, they are getniggers. :D :D :D :D :D
Lmfao!
-
Personally, if you just got ND, Kazan and Tu Holmes together, they could probably take out the whole American military. I mean, they are getniggers. :D :D :D :D :D
Getniggers > US Military + Mossad + Spetznaz
-
And most people who stockpile weapons are stockpiling ammo too. I love people who don't have the faintest idea on guns talking about them lol I know PLENTY of ex military combat vets who aren't giving up their weapons anytime soon. This really is a moot point .Gov isn't going to face the armed American public they're much more subversive , backdoor policies , " common sense " bullshit , almost 100 years of infringing on people's Second Amendment rights and people are getting sick of it. Hey politicians are politicians they need to tow the party line.
If the government declared war on the citizens of the U.S., then 99% of the politicians would be dead within a week.
-
Okay, that was a TYPO!!!! I meant, "GETBIGGERS!!!"
-
This is what the Second Amendment was made for. .Gov pushed and people pushed back
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)
-
If the government declared war on the citizens of the U.S., then 99% of the politicians would be dead within a week.
If that :-X
-
Dead-end cause. They're not getting public support because they're unable to succinctly define the injustice to which they object and whatever solution they propose in a way that makes anyone give a shit. As far as I can tell they want to make more money by having their cows eat government grass so they're arguing that the government doesn't have the right to manage the land. And that this is tyrannical in some way.
At most, it'll make people go hmm and undertake a scholarly investigation into the constitutionality of federal land management versus a state's right to make the rules. They'll never inspire a visceral reaction from the general public and gain popular support with this. There's no egregious injustice that's going to serve as a rallying point in this academic investigation. The attempt to manufacture one by framing the arsonists as martyrs is transparent and off target. Again, it has to be explained to people. There's a bunch of legal minutia swirling around. It doesn't work. You need something that's immediately obvious as unjust and makes everyone say 'no, fuck that' as soon as they hear about it if you're going to win popular support for your cause. They don't have one of those.
I don't have any strong feelings either way about whether a state is entitled to a more active role in managing the land within it's borders. I just don't care. This whole thing looks to me like a rich man's cause anyway. The ranchers with their thousands of subsidized acres and millions of dollars worth of stock and plant are shitty because they could have made $10 mil last year instead of a lousy $2 mil if that meddling federal government hadn't come along and told them to stay on their own land. Baron Von Derp really expects all the $7/hr guys are going to form themselves into ranks for his cause?
-
Okay, that was a TYPO!!!! I meant, "GETBIGGERS!!!"
LMAO sure sure
GetNigger 4 Lyfe
-
LMAO sure sure
GetNigger 4 Lyfe
It was!! >:( >:(
-
LMAO sure sure
GetNigger 4 Lyfe
Represent, ND!!
-
LMAO sure sure
GetNigger 4 Lyfe
No one is better than us GetNiggers.
-
SF1900 has united us!!
-
SF1900 has united us!!
It's what I do, broskie. Uniting GETBIGGERS everywhere!!!
-
It's what I do, broskie. Uniting GETBIGGERS everywhere!!!
It's okay to use a term of endearment and familiarity amongst your own kind. :)
Can't speak for anyone else but it didn't seem the least bit hostile or mean-spirited.
-
as was stated before, protecting your home from an intruder is not what Stand Your Ground laws are about. Protecting your home from an intruder was justifiable long before Stand Your Ground laws became popular. (BTW, no Stand Your Ground laws in California, but we do have Castle Doctrine.)
But a normal person should think that if the chances of needing to protect my children from an intruder is X, and the chances of my children getting hurt or killed from the thing I use to protect my children from an intruder is Y, and Y is much greater than X, I probably should find another way to protect my children from the unlikely chance of an intruder. 1 866 24 7 4 9 99
That's ridiculous. Even if I didn't have children I reserve the right to protect myself, my wife and my property and if that means using a gun that's prerogative. If someone breaks into YOUR home how are you going to protect yourself? Are you going to try to "reason" with them? lol
-
Dead-end cause. They're not getting public support because they're unable to succinctly define the injustice to which they object and whatever solution they propose in a way that makes anyone give a shit. As far as I can tell they want to make more money by having their cows eat government grass so they're arguing that the government doesn't have the right to manage the land. And that this is tyrannical in some way.
At most, it'll make people go hmm and undertake a scholarly investigation into the constitutionality of federal land management versus a state's right to make the rules. They'll never inspire a visceral reaction from the general public and gain popular support with this. There's no egregious injustice that's going to serve as a rallying point in this academic investigation. The attempt to manufacture one by framing the arsonists as martyrs is transparent and off target. Again, it has to be explained to people. There's a bunch of legal minutia swirling around. It doesn't work. You need something that's immediately obvious as unjust and makes everyone say 'no, fuck that' as soon as they hear about it if you're going to win popular support for your cause. They don't have one of those.
I don't have any strong feelings either way about whether a state is entitled to a more active role in managing the land within it's borders. I just don't care. This whole thing looks to me like a rich man's cause anyway. The ranchers with their thousands of subsidized acres and millions of dollars worth of stock and plant are shitty because they could have made $10 mil last year instead of a lousy $2 mil if that meddling federal government hadn't come along and told them to stay on their own land. Baron Von Derp really expects all the $7/hr guys are going to form themselves into ranks for his cause?
You make a good point, and I am starting to think this whole thing is a suicide mission for the $7/hr guys. I would imagine they figured the feds would come in hot like Waco or Ruby Ridge and the militias would mobilize and CW2 kicks off.
-
That's ridiculous. Even if I didn't have children I reserve the right to protect myself, my wife and my property and if that means using a gun that's prerogative. If someone breaks into YOUR home how are you going to protect yourself? Are you going to try to "reason" with them? lol
Harsh language bro ;D
-
Dead-end cause. They're not getting public support because they're unable to succinctly define the injustice to which they object and whatever solution they propose in a way that makes anyone give a shit. As far as I can tell they want to make more money by having their cows eat government grass so they're arguing that the government doesn't have the right to manage the land. And that this is tyrannical in some way.
At most, it'll make people go hmm and undertake a scholarly investigation into the constitutionality of federal land management versus a state's right to make the rules. They'll never inspire a visceral reaction from the general public and gain popular support with this. There's no egregious injustice that's going to serve as a rallying point in this academic investigation. The attempt to manufacture one by framing the arsonists as martyrs is transparent and off target. Again, it has to be explained to people. There's a bunch of legal minutia swirling around. It doesn't work. You need something that's immediately obvious as unjust and makes everyone say 'no, fuck that' as soon as they hear about it if you're going to win popular support for your cause. They don't have one of those.
I don't have any strong feelings either way about whether a state is entitled to a more active role in managing the land within it's borders. I just don't care. This whole thing looks to me like a rich man's cause anyway. The ranchers with their thousands of subsidized acres and millions of dollars worth of stock and plant are shitty because they could have made $10 mil last year instead of a lousy $2 mil if that meddling federal government hadn't come along and told them to stay on their own land. Baron Von Derp really expects all the $7/hr guys are going to form themselves into ranks for his cause?
These people exist in a kind of bubble where they exclude external sources of information. I think the technical term is "epistemic closure" another way to say it is stupid and crazy. Seems about half fanatic ideology half money grab. Indeed the key is to have a justifiable grievance to gather wide public support.
-
Good points , but the point stands. How many on the bases would open fire on fellow Americans because .Gov decided to unconstitutionally ban firearms? provocative questions no doubt but even if the minority of gun owners fought back let's say 10% that's 10 million armed citizens that poses a MAJOR problem for anyone. It wouldn't be a lopsided massacre in their favor.
That's how this country got started , a bunch of tax evading " terrorist " rebels going against the mightiest military force on the planet.
The military and police exist to protect the banks, gov and the rich. Why do you think more cops show up to a bank robbery than a murder scene. Bank protection is key 1.
Sure a big part of the military may refuse to fight against Americans but a big chunk will look at an uprising as a group of enemies. I keep harping on drones but it's so much easier for a psycho military guy to sit in a chair in a dark room and drop carpet bombs across a city without dealing with the horror, blood or aftermath.
-
Even if I didn't have children
Even if you didn't have children??? My point was that having a gun in the house is a higher risk for children than the possibility of an intruder. I would not want to place my children at risk by having a gun in the house.
If someone breaks into YOUR home how are you going to protect yourself? Are you going to try to "reason" with them? lol
No, I'm going to get out of the house and call the police. What is the worst that an intruder can do? Steal my Herb Ritts print?
-
Even if you didn't have children??? My point was that having a gun in the house is a higher risk for children than the possibility of an intruder. I would not want to place my children at risk by having a gun in the house.
No, I'm going to get out of the house and call the police. What is the worst that an intruder can do? Steal my Herb Ritts print?
Do you know what the average response time is for police?
Someone coming into your house isn't trying to let you run out.
-
This thread needs some farmer music!
-
Okay, that was a TYPO!!!! I meant, "GETBIGGERS!!!"
😁
-
Even if you didn't have children??? My point was that having a gun in the house is a higher risk for children than the possibility of an intruder. I would not want to place my children at risk by having a gun in the house.
No, I'm going to get out of the house and call the police. What is the worst that an intruder can do? Steal my Herb Ritts print?
Your little theory works great and all until you realize that the majority of the United States is still rural and that law enforcement can be 45 to an hour or more away.
So what are you going to do? Run a few miles to find help? The police cannot help stop a crime taking place in many areas. It makes no sense to deprive anyone else of their right to defend themself just because you can have the police there in an instant on speed dial in your urban environment.
Take Vermont for example. They have HIGH gun ownership and LOW, EXTREMELY LOW instances of gun violence. Every stop and wonder why that is?
I would LOVE to hear your answer. Can you answer why that is for me please?
-
as was stated before, protecting your home from an intruder is not what Stand Your Ground laws are about. Protecting your home from an intruder was justifiable long before Stand Your Ground laws became popular. (BTW, no Stand Your Ground laws in California, but we do have Castle Doctrine.)
But a normal person should think that if the chances of needing to protect my children from an intruder is X, and the chances of my children getting hurt or killed from the thing I use to protect my children from an intruder is Y, and Y is much greater than X, I probably should find another way to protect my children from the unlikely chance of an intruder. 1 866 24 7 4 9 99
Why are you assuming that you have to have children to defend yourself with a firearm? Where did you get that shit from and why are you repeating this?
-
Your little theory works great and all until you realize that the majority of the United States is still rural and that law enforcement can be 45 to an hour or more away.
So what are you going to do? Run a few miles to find help? The police cannot help stop a crime taking place in many areas. It makes no sense to deprive anyone else of their right to defend themself just because you can have the police there in an instant on speed dial in your urban environment.
Take Vermont for example. They have HIGH gun ownership and LOW, EXTREMELY LOW instances of gun violence. Every stop and wonder why that is?
I would LOVE to hear your answer. Can you answer why that is for me please?
Is 1.2% black or African American what you're waiting to read?
-
Even if you didn't have children??? My point was that having a gun in the house is a higher risk for children than the possibility of an intruder. I would not want to place my children at risk by having a gun in the house.
No, I'm going to get out of the house and call the police. What is the worst that an intruder can do? Steal my Herb Ritts print?
So a group of armed violent intruders break into your house looking to rob and kill you and you're just going to "get out of the house and call the police"?
How exactly are you going to pull that off?
-
Even if you didn't have children??? My point was that having a gun in the house is a higher risk for children than the possibility of an intruder. I would not want to place my children at risk by having a gun in the house.
No, I'm going to get out of the house and call the police. What is the worst that an intruder can do? Steal my Herb Ritts print?
Get out of your house? What if the person lives in a house with 1 entrance, which is the front door. And what if there is an intruder guarding the front door with a shotgun? Many people who break into homes do it in packs (more than 1 person).
Don't you watch Investigative Discovery? In every home invasion, the person RARELY ever escapes the house. They usually go hiding in the home or attempt to fight off the attacker.
I mean, seriously, get out of the house. Sure, you can try that, but your in no way guaranteed that you will be able to leave the home.
Although I do not consider myself a democrat in strict terms, I have more democratic ideals than I do republican ideals. However, youre the reason why democrats look bad because youre living in a fantasy world. Get out of the house. Really? Are you living in reality?
Im at the point where I am thinking of even owning a handgun for home protection.
-
.
No, I'm going to get out of the house and call the police. What is the worst that an intruder can do? Steal my Herb Ritts print?
(https://i.imgflip.com/w2l98.jpg)
-
Is 1.2% black or African American what you're waiting to read?
sadly, the causes of gun violence are not studied in the US.
but I'm eager to hear the answer to this question too!
-
Get out of your house? What if the person lives in a house with 1 entrance, which is the front door. And what if there is an intruder guarding the front door with a shotgun? Many people who break into homes do it in packs (more than 1 person).
Don't you watch Investigative Discovery? In every home invasion, the person RARELY ever escapes the house. They usually go hiding in the home or attempt to fight off the attacker.
I mean, seriously, get out of the house. Sure, you can try that, but your in no way guaranteed that you will be able to leave the home.
Although I do not consider myself a democrat in strict terms, I have more democratic ideals than I do republican ideals. However, youre the reason why democrats look bad because youre living in a fantasy world. Get out of the house. Really? Are you living in reality?
Im at the point where I am thinking of even owning a handgun for home protection.
:o a pro gun thread from sf1900.
-
:o a pro gun thread from sf1900.
Im not anti-gun.
One of my best friends owns about 8-10 guns, and I go target and skeet shooting with him all the time.
My cousins husband also owns about 6 guns and we go target shooting.
Ive shot plenty of guns before.
ps - But I wont go hunting with my cousins husband. Its fine that he hunts, but I am not shooting bambi. :'( :'(
-
sadly, the causes of gun violence are not studied in the US.
but I'm eager to hear the answer to this question too!
It may be one of the more affluent states.
Drove through there last year on college visits with one of the kids.... was colder than a witch's titty in a brass bra.
-
It may be one of the more affluent states.
Drove through there last year on college visits with one of the kids.... was colder than a witch's titty in a brass bra.
2014 stats:
Vermont did not make the top 10 for the most richest states.
It also was not listed as one of the top 10 poorest states.
Thus, I am guessing it falls somewhere in the middle.
-
Tim the Enchanter is going to get out and phone the police. Sure he is...
Don't want a gun, don't buy one. Don't try to take them from responsible Americans. Switch gun with "penis".
"Make penises against the law because when penises are outlawed only outlaws will have penises!" Sounds stupid, huh?
So does the enchanted one.
-
.... was colder than a witch's titty in a brass bra.
Excellent olde world reference, sir! No, really it was! I rarely hear or see it used as most people haven't a clue. I digress.
-
Excellent olde world reference, sir! No, really it was! I rarely hear or see it used as most people haven't a clue. I digress.
I occasionally hear the first half.
-
All this more likely to be hurt by a gun in the home is a pure horseshit stat. It is very narrow, "more likely to be killed than to kill with a gun in the house" was the original study. Very flawed methodology, deliberately so. It did not account for using a gun to warn an intruder off rather than killing them or injuring them. It also included thing like suicides. I think the guy who did the study also said he included instances where the intruder Himself brought the gun into the house but left that fact out. Very bullshit. Most people hear of that "stat" in some bastardized exaggerated form like here and think it is true. It is not.
-
All this more likely to be hurt by a gun in the home is a pure horseshit stat. It is very narrow, "more likely to be killed than to kill with a gun in the house" was the original study. Very flawed methodology, deliberately so. It did not account for using a gun to warn an intruder off rather than killing them or injuring them. It also included thing like suicides. I think the guy who did the study also said he included instances where the intruder Himself brought the gun into the house but left that fact out. Very bullshit. Most people hear of that "stat" in some bastardized exaggerated form like here and think it is true. It is not.
There are three kinds of lies.....
-
Harsh language bro ;D
I hate spell check :(
-
Im not anti-gun.
One of my best friends owns about 8-10 guns, and I go target and skeet shooting with him all the time.
My cousins husband also owns about 6 guns and we go target shooting.
Ive shot plenty of guns before.
ps - But I wont go hunting with my cousins husband. Its fine that he hunts, but I am not shooting bambi. :'( :'(
I won't hunt personally unless society truly breaks down.
I hunted as a kid with my Dad. It was his thing because he was hick. (Not a redneck)
He was genetically predisposed to do things that rednecks go out of their way to do.
Back to the point.
Unless I'm forced to, I don't hunt, but I can and would if it became survival. Same with fishing.
Guns though. They are as American as apple pie.
-
LOL these inbred hillbillies just look worse and worse, the more airtime they get.
obama should be paying these fcksticks to keep portraying repubs in such a negative light.
-
All this more likely to be hurt by a gun in the home is a pure horseshit stat. It is very narrow, "more likely to be killed than to kill with a gun in the house" was the original study. Very flawed methodology, deliberately so. It did not account for using a gun to warn an intruder off rather than killing them or injuring them. It also included thing like suicides. I think the guy who did the study also said he included instances where the intruder Himself brought the gun into the house but left that fact out. Very bullshit. Most people hear of that "stat" in some bastardized exaggerated form like here and think it is true. It is not.
this one?
http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506
as the resident gun expert I'm inclined to follow up on such matters.
-
as the resident gun expert I'm inclined to follow up on such matters.
Oh brother.
::)
Only gun expert to never fire a gun.
-
Your little theory works great and all until you realize that the majority of the United States is still rural
"The urban areas of the United States for the 2010 Census contain 249,253,271 people, representing 80.7% of the population, and rural areas contain 59,492,276 people, or 19.3% of the population."
the discussion was what Coach would do vs what I would do. We both live in the same urban area.
It makes no sense to deprive anyone else of their right to defend themself just because you can have the police there in an instant on speed dial in your urban environment.
I have never called for confiscation of guns. the issue was also what risk you would expose your children or others to. I would not want a gun in my house because the risk of accidental shooting and attempted suicides is too great.
and from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=2172
3.7 million burglaries each year, 28% of those were when someone was home, 7% there was a victim of violence.
But here is the thing: Offenders were know to their victims in 65% of violent burglaries.
-
(http://memecrunch.com/meme/1TR3V/tim-murray-enchanter/image.png)
-
who was the misinformed person that said they took over an abandoned building?
they're currently camped out in the office of a biologist Dr Sherry, who cannot go to work because they're eating pizza and sleeping in her office.
They are printing new govt letterhead, planning on how to slide up these public lands between their corporate friends. Their bodyguard "buddha" just bailed on them. they're a confused mess. this is all about profit.
-
All red in the face and shaking like a bowl of jelly - the fat guy always gives out first.
-
who was the misinformed person that said they took over an abandoned building?
they're currently camped out in the office of a biologist Dr Sherry, who cannot go to work because they're eating pizza and sleeping in her office.
They are printing new govt letterhead, planning on how to slide up these public lands between their corporate friends. Their bodyguard "buddha" just bailed on them. they're a confused mess. this is all about profit.
Link?
-
rawstory.com is all over it.
now I hear one of the protesters took the donation money and went drinking. Truth?
FBI are letting them come and go, just following the leadership. Media is having a field day tailing them, seeing what they're up to.
-
The GOP’s sympathy for sedition
Republican lawmakers began the new year in Washington with new ideas about how to undermine the government in which they serve.
On Wednesday, the first legislative day of the year, House conservatives gathered with reporters for their monthly “Conversations with Conservatives.” When the questioning turned to the armed rebellion in Oregon against the authority of the federal government, these representatives of the United States stood with the rebels.
“You have just a frustration that they feel the federal government is not listening to them anymore, and that’s what leads to what so far has been a peaceful takeover — of an abandoned building, by the way — and the media, I think, is so quick to sort of cast aspersions on that group of people,” declared Rep. Raúl Labrador, an Idaho Republican and leader of House conservatives.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-gops-sympathy-for-sedition/2016/01/06/9e9f61da-b4c1-11e5-9388-466021d971de_story.html
:o
???
-
-
Morale at Oregon Standoff Collapses After Militia Member Goes AWOL, Drinks Away Donation Money
The week-long Oregon standoff at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, already the butt of many jokes, is already falling apart due to infighting between group members.
According to a Facebook video that he has since removed from his profile, Cai Irvin, one of the gunmen holding down the federal bird sanctuary, claimed that one of the “patriots” walked off the camp to stay in a hotel and drink away the donations he raked in to be part of the insurgency.
The man in question is identified as Joe O’Shaugnessy, otherwise known as “Capt. O,” allegedly a member of the Arizona militia. Capt. O had been arguing with others at the occupation and ended up checking into a motel room Wednesday night where other pseudo-supporters have been staying.
Infamous anti-Muslim organizer and fellow Arizonan militant John Ritzheimer, also present in Oregon for the standoff, went over to the motel to confirm O’Shaugnessy’s desertion. Ritzheimer found him drinking alcohol paid for with the donations given to him by fellow “patriots” wishing to support the effort, according to disabled National Guard member and group spokesperson Maureen Peltier.
“Ritzheimer did call me – he’s fucking pissed, he’s mad, he’s upset. He told me to tell all of you that Joe O’Shaugnessy is a deserter and a coward,” Irvin said.
Read more: http://usuncut.com/news/oregon-standoff-member-caught-drinking-donation-money/
-
dey toork ar jerbs
-
The fat guy cracks. The Irish guy gets drunk. Right now they're in there asking, "
No one in here is Greek, right?" "None of you guys follow bodybuilding, right?"
-
White guys can't terrorism?
-
White guys can't terrorism?
are you saying if 30 Arabs took over a federal building with guns, threatening to kill, planning a new govt to divide up federal lands, that anything would be different? They would be allowed to go out to eat and keep govt workers out of their offices because, well, they felt like it?
Are you saying if this dude leading it was named "hussein" and not "bundy", anything would be different?
-
are you saying if 30 Arabs took over a federal building with guns, threatening to kill, planning a new govt to divide up federal lands, that anything would be different? They would be allowed to go out to eat and keep govt workers out of their offices because, well, they felt like it?
Are you saying if this dude leading it was named "hussein" and not "bundy", anything would be different?
Well, all the hotel-ing and boozing doesn't exactly scream jihad. A fight in an IHOP parking lot is more fundamental.
-
are you saying if 30 Arabs took over a federal building with guns, threatening to kill, planning a new govt to divide up federal lands, that anything would be different? They would be allowed to go out to eat and keep govt workers out of their offices because, well, they felt like it?
Are you saying if this dude leading it was named "hussein" and not "bundy", anything would be different?
This thread would have a little more activity. :)
-
This thread would have a little more activity. :)
the getbig militia would be out in full
-
the getbig militia would be out in full
You don't think there'd be an outcry for goat grazing rights?
-
White guys can't terrorism?
They've actually been doing it since the Mayflower landed
-
are you saying if 30 Arabs took over a federal building with guns, threatening to kill, planning a new govt to divide up federal lands, that anything would be different? They would be allowed to go out to eat and keep govt workers out of their offices because, well, they felt like it?
Are you saying if this dude leading it was named "hussein" and not "bundy", anything would be different?
Terrible trollolol.
-
www.RawStory.com
read the tweets and see videos from reporters on the ground interviewing the protesters.
Brutal infighting. Someone in their posse beat up a disabled vet, now they are demanding polygraphs because he's accusing 2 of the founders but they say it wasn't them. Another one isn't really a vet, he's been outed for pretending to be. Another drank away their donation $.
They're cracking under the pressure. It's like Obama is paying them to act the fool in the national spotlight just to illustrate how stupid they are. And of course, 5 minutes after they do break up the party, I'm sure they'll be arrested in their homes. They are damaging govt property and have been using those offices for a week now in their efforts to re-distribute those lands.
-
White guys can't terrorism?
They can. Vanilla Isis.
-
Throw guns into the mix of a BLM protest and what happens?
It's not about race but instances like this remind us how big the gap is when it comes to rights and interacting with law enforcement.
Not all sharks are killers but you'd be a fool to jump into an ocean where sharks are swimming. This is how cops and every white person sees blacks. You might be a nice shark but the others have ruined it for your kind. So excuse the diver who shoots the shark coming towards him. It's not worth risking his life in the hopes that it's a nice shark. Hope this clarifies everything for you.
-
Oregon committee created by Ammon Bundy tells armed occupiers: ‘Your point has been made — now leave’
Saying they appreciated bringing attention to federal control of lands in their Oregon community, a spokesperson for the recently formed Harney County Committee of Safety asked the militants to give up their occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge and leave town.
According to the Oregonian, the committee — previously affiliated with occupation leader Ammon Bundy — held a townhall Friday evening where a draft letter was read to the packed house, that can be summed up as: “you made your point, now it’s time for you to go home.”
Previously Bundy has said that the occupiers would abide by the community’s wishes, so it remains to be seen whether the occupation will end as it enters the completion of its first week.
Speaking for the Safety Committee, Melodi Molt read a the letter to be given to the occupiers that took pains to commend them for “shining a light on the Hammond case here in Harney County.”
“Your actions have created a national focus on the Hammonds and other issues here and across the West that have created mutual distrust, anger and unrest between the people of the land and the federal government,” Molt read. “We thank you for stirring us to action.”
With that in mind, Molt criticized the group, saying that the committee members “were very upset that you chose to take the aggressive action of occupying the refuge and did it without our knowledge or any local approval, and in a fashion that has created huge distrust and loss of credibility of and for us as a group and as residents within the community.”
“We approved of most of your message but disapprove of your unilateral methods of occupation,” she continued.
“We ask that you organize your people, explain that your point has been made and leave in a peaceful and honorable fashion,” Molt continued, to loud applause from the assembled locals.
According to the Oregonian, no one officially representing the occupiers attended the meeting although militia members are free to come and go from the occupied bird refuge.
Watch the video below from the Oregonian:
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/oregon-committee-created-by-ammon-bundy-tells-armed-occupiers-your-point-has-been-made-now-leave/
-
That's a Felony...
Oregon militants caught using government computer and Social Security number list
Ammon Bundy’s group of Oregon militants may have been caught looking at federal employee data as well as computers, Oregon Public Broadcasting reported.
OPB reporter John Sepulvado said that LaVoy Finnicum — who appeared on national television earlier this week vowing to die rather than be arrested — mistakenly led him into a room full of cubicles and computers on the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, saying the group planned to convert the space into a “media center” to accommodate news outlets.
However, Sepulvado stated, Finnicum later grabbed lists of names and Social Security numbers located near the computers while also hiding government employee identification cards.
“Three of the computers were turned on, and in screen saver mode,” he wrote. “Papers in the room were strewn about in a disorderly manner.”
Bundy’s brother, Ryan Bundy, then entered the room and denied any malfeasance.
“No, we haven’t touched a single personal item,” he said. “We haven’t touched any of the computers, we haven’t tried to log on — we haven’t done anything. We’re not here to hurt people, not even the people who work here.”
http://www.opb.org/news/series/burns-oregon-standoff-bundy-militia-news-updates/militants-have-accessed-government-computers-at-refuge/
-
Official Member Of Trump Campaign Joins Oregon Militia
he co-chairman of Donald Trump’s New Hampshire “Veterans for Trump” group has arrived in Burns, Oregon, to assist the small cadre of armed men who are seeking to provoke a standoff with federal officials there.
That not-quite-standoff began over the weekend when a handful of men led by Ammon Bundy decided to turn a much larger peaceful protest over a decision to send two ranchers back to jail for arson into an armed struggle. The group’s numbers are small – especially compared to the 300 who reportedly joined the peaceful protest of the re-sentencing – but they have now been reinforced by Jerry DeLemus, a former United States Marine living on the opposite side of the country.
Trump himself has said little about the situation in Oregon, following the pattern of most of the GOP primary candidates. But on Tuesday he seemed to tell The Hill it was time for the Bundy crew to pack it in and go home. “You have to maintain law and order, no matter what,” he said.
It is at least the second time DeLemus has ridden to the physical aid of a Bundy. When Ammon’s father Cliven had his cattle impounded by the Bureau of Land Management in 2014 over more than $1 million in unpaid fines and fees for his use of public lands, DeLemus and his son drove 41 hours in three days to come help.
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/01/07/3737011/bundy-trump-chair/
-
240 melting down early Saturday morning.
-
There actually isn't such a thing as an "oppressed white farmer" ;D
-
240 melting down, early Saturday morning.
What is a James Taylor song for $1,000, Alex?
-
Cliffs?
-
Cliffs?
White people Whiting. Move along, citizen.
-
Cliffs?
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/84/4e/98/844e98c707c9f8834aeaf518d9b28131.jpg)(http://svenskanamn.alltforforaldrar.se/uploads/448399/4c4dbceaae83e20.jpg)(http://spyhollywood.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/cliff_richards.jpg)
-
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/84/4e/98/844e98c707c9f8834aeaf518d9b28131.jpg)(http://svenskanamn.alltforforaldrar.se/uploads/448399/4c4dbceaae83e20.jpg)(http://spyhollywood.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/cliff_richards.jpg)
Cliff wall.
-
From tampons to french vanilla creamer: Armed Oregon militants update their occupation wish list
One week into their uninvited stay at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, the militia members who have occupied the park have given no indication that they will be leaving soon, posting a wish list of items they have requested from their backers.
Despite the fact that the local “safety committee” founded by leader Ammon Bundy has asked them to leave, the list — posted on social media — indicates that they are in it for the long haul, with requests for bedding, throw rugs, shelving units to store food and ice chests.
Previously, the occupiers were mocked for their requests for “snacks,” indicating a short stay, but the new list has expanded to food item staples including eggs, flour, coffee, hamburgers and hot dogs, french vanilla creamer and assorted condiments including Miracle Whip.
Apparently many of the militiamen rushed to Oregon to help hold the park without packing properly for freezing temperatures, with the list also asking for boots, socks, thermal underwear, snow pants, warm blankets and sleeping bags.
Personal care items requested include body wash, shampoo, tampons, shaving cream, razors and deodorant.
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/from-tampons-to-french-vanilla-creamer-armed-oregon-militants-update-their-occupation-wish-list/
-
Bundy militia standoff escalates when another heavily-armed group arrives to provide ‘security’
There ay be more drama afoot at the Bundy militia standoff at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.
In a moment of irony, a new group of armed miltiamen has arrived at the standoff in Harney County, Oregon, and the ones that have been there since last Saturday say their presence is unwanted.
The Oregonian reports that the Pacific Patriot Network has sent armed “security” — some of whom are carrying semi-automatic rifles — to the standoff on Saturday. But an attorney mediating the dispute between Ammon Bundy and federal officials said Bundy wants them to leave.
“We don’t need that. We don’t want it and we’re asking you to leave,” Todd MacFarlane, an attorney mediating the dispute on behalf of the Bundys, told reporters Saturday.
In a press conference Saturday morning, a representative from the Bundy group said they are looking to de-escalate the situation.
Locals in the area of the standoff have, in turn, condemned the Bundy takeover. Residents have expressed fear at the presence of armed militia and asked the outsiders to leave.
MacFarlane said members of the original occupation are “alarmed” by the new arrivals.
“This was the last thing in the world they wanted to see happen,” MacFarlane told reporters. He stressed that Bundy didn’t request that the group come, and stressed their presence is unwanted.
Brandon Curtiss, leader of the Pacific Patriot Network, said the group will not be staying inside the refuge with the Bundy group, but will be “patrolling the perimeter,” according to the Oregonian.
The occupation of the bird sanctuary started last week, when Ammon Bundy, son of rancher Cliven Bundy, led the group there after a protest over the imprisonment of ranchers Dwight and Steven Hammond. The men have been sentenced to federal prison terms for setting fires on federal property. The Bundy group believes the ranchers’ rights are being violated and wants locals to take control over the federal land they are occupying.
Cliven Bundy’s ranch in Nevada was the focus of a standoff with federal officers last year, after a disagreement over cattle grazing.
Then, they left.
-
If 240 only devoted this much attention to things in real life.
-
some comments from the local tribe
-
Wait, the injuns joined this stand-off now as well?
Chief Sitting Bear and his braves=
-
What if, what if, what if....
What if a frog had wings? ::)
-
I just don't understand how this is still a thing?
I mean, seriously. Over a week?
What. The. Fuck.
-
I just don't understand how this is still a thing?
I mean, seriously. Over a week?
What. The. Fuck.
I lost interest a long time ago.
See the story about the guyin Texas that held out for 15 years? Acquitted in 2014 but nobody told him or the sheriff. Lol
-
I lost interest a long time ago.
See the story about the guyin Texas that held out for 15 years? Acquitted in 2014 but nobody told him or the sheriff. Lol
I didn't!!!
Where is this story?!
Holy shit.
-
I didn't!!!
Where is this story?!
Holy shit.
http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/local/texas-news/2016/01/08/15-year-armed-standoff-quietly-ends-outside-dallas/78452414/
-
http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/local/texas-news/2016/01/08/15-year-armed-standoff-quietly-ends-outside-dallas/78452414/
Hold up on his 47 acre property for 14 years.
DAMN!
That's pretty much prison.
-
some comments from the local tribe
Sacred land? Only a casino may be built upon it...
-
these folks are in an ACTIVE govt office. They're in this woman's office using her computer to splice up federal lands for fracking and hunting buddies.
they come and go. they go out to eat. they've had some fights. they've done interviews. They brought in bulldozers so they could have cover from rifle fire.
My *guess* is that the govt figures they'll run out of food, beat each other up, just give up, etc... then they can quiet bring charges against them anytime for the damage they did, etc. Most have things to lose, so they'll be jumping to snitch on each other and testify.
-
False flag by the govt. next week law enforcement will move in to peacefully remove them, one of the protestors will use a big scary ar15 to shoot a LEO, and ar15s will be banned.
-
who cares if some guys are occupying some building? If it doesnt directly affect your life why give a shit?
Ive really embraced this in my life, if it doesnt affect me I couldnt give a flying fuck anymore
-
From tampons to french vanilla creamer: Armed Oregon militants update their occupation wish list
One week into their uninvited stay at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, the militia members who have occupied the park have given no indication that they will be leaving soon, posting a wish list of items they have requested from their backers.
Despite the fact that the local “safety committee” founded by leader Ammon Bundy has asked them to leave, the list — posted on social media — indicates that they are in it for the long haul, with requests for bedding, throw rugs, shelving units to store food and ice chests.
Previously, the occupiers were mocked for their requests for “snacks,” indicating a short stay, but the new list has expanded to food item staples including eggs, flour, coffee, hamburgers and hot dogs, french vanilla creamer and assorted condiments including Miracle Whip.
Apparently many of the militiamen rushed to Oregon to help hold the park without packing properly for freezing temperatures, with the list also asking for boots, socks, thermal underwear, snow pants, warm blankets and sleeping bags.
Personal care items requested include body wash, shampoo, tampons, shaving cream, razors and deodorant.
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/from-tampons-to-french-vanilla-creamer-armed-oregon-militants-update-their-occupation-wish-list/
Confirmed....white people. ;D
-
who cares if some guys are occupying some building? If it doesnt directly affect your life why give a shit?
Ive really embraced this in my life, if it doesnt affect me I couldnt give a flying fuck anymore
You're Canadian, it's doesn't affect your life one bit if Americans don't have equal rights.
-
What if, what if, what if....
What if a frog had wings? ::)
who was there first?
???
-
Sacred land? Only a casino may be built upon it...
8)
didn't hear this fellow say anything about sacred land, I think that was another lady.
-
You're Canadian, it's doesn't affect your life one bit if Americans don't have equal rights.
hmm ya except that canada follows in lock-step every single US policy (with a few exceptions ofcourse ;D)
-
False flag by the govt. next week law enforcement will move in to peacefully remove them, one of the protestors will use a big scary ar15 to shoot a LEO, and ar15s will be banned.
Can't really be a false flag when there are definitely people carrying ARs around there and they've made statements saying they would shoot people.
-
Why should I care about some farmer hillbillies squatting in a building in Oregon?
The Oregon trail computer game has had a bigger impact on my life.
-
Why should I care about some farmer hillbillies squatting in a building in Oregon?
The Oregon trail computer game has had a bigger impact on my life.
Same, it was a great game so it's no surprise that it had a great impact on our lives.
-
Why should I care about some farmer hillbillies squatting in a building in Oregon?
The Oregon trail computer game has had a bigger impact on my life.
lol
-
who was there first?
???
The "Native Americans".
-
who was there first?
???
Mel Tormé
-
hmm ya except that canada follows in lock-step every single US policy (with a few exceptions ofcourse ;D)
We'll catch up to you in taxes eventually. :)
-
hmm ya except that canada follows in lock-step every single US policy (with a few exceptions ofcourse ;D)
When are you guys gonna have a black prsident???....do you have a lot of black politicians there?
-
Militia
Wow! What a scary looking group of people. ::)
-
Not all sharks are killers but you'd be a fool to jump into an ocean where sharks are swimming. This is how cops and every white person sees blacks. You might be a nice shark but the others have ruined it for your kind. So excuse the diver who shoots the shark coming towards him. It's not worth risking his life in the hopes that it's a nice shark. Hope this clarifies everything for you.
Could you come up with a more stupid analogy?
Hitler was white. Are you afraid of all white people?
FKN sharks, LOL!
-
Not all sharks are killers but you'd be a fool to jump into an ocean where sharks are swimming. This is how cops and every white person sees blacks. You might be a nice shark but the others have ruined it for your kind. So excuse the diver who shoots the shark coming towards him. It's not worth risking his life in the hopes that it's a nice shark. Hope this clarifies everything for you.
"You might be a nice shark...."
Hilarious! :D
-
When are you guys gonna have a black prsident???....do you have a lot of black politicians there?
I don't see it coming down the pipe any time soon. ;D The population is about 3% black folks and 97% are in cities. Subsequently very few get into high office.
-
I don't see it coming down the pipe any time soon. ;D The population is about 3% black folks and 97% are in cities. Subsequently very few get into to high office.
Thanks for the info...interesting
-
obama did make some comments on the bundy crew
8)
-
Militia
Wow! What a scary looking group of people. ::)
Careful Primemuscle, I fear guys like AJ are a few insults away from opening fire at the local White Castle.
We should not promote mental illness.
-
Can't really be a false flag when there are definitely people carrying ARs around there and they've made statements saying they would shoot people.
Government actors.
-
they could end this in 5 minutes.
jam their wifi and wireless cell service. all of it.
without being able to tweet and get attention, they'll be beating the shit out of each other in 2 days.
-
they could end this in 5 minutes.
jam their wifi and wireless cell service. all of it.
without being able to tweet and get attention, they'll be beating the shit out of each other in 2 days.
Jamming Americans internet ::)
What is this the people's republic of North Korea.
-
Jamming Americans internet ::)
What is this the people's republic of North Korea.
that was uncalled for
-
that was uncalled for
My apologies best Korea leader
-
Jamming Americans internet ::)
What is this the people's republic of North Korea.
well, when these americans are on federal lands... and they're there illegally, having taken over employee workspace and set up cots so they could re-portion lands for drilling...
well, we're not talking about jamming their phones in their homes. We're talking about stopping communication means for armed people who have already called for govt overthrow, after taking over a federal building. I think that's cool to jam their communication... some say they're already making terrorist threats...
-
Could you come up with a more stupid analogy?
Hitler was white. Are you afraid of all white people?
FKN sharks, LOL!
We just turn on the news for a few minutes and see 2000 blacks running through a mall causing mayhem and destruction like a scene straight out of Planet of the Apes and we know it's best to just avoid places where blacks go. It's a perfect analogy. Sorry I had to be the one to break the bad news to you. Even liberals joke about this when their fake black friends have left.
-
well, when these americans are on federal lands... and they're there illegally, having taken over employee workspace and set up cots so they could re-portion lands for drilling...
well, we're not talking about jamming their phones in their homes. We're talking about stopping communication means for armed people who have already called for govt overthrow, after taking over a federal building. I think that's cool to jam their communication... some say they're already making terrorist threats...
Nothing illegal or wrong about being armed in America. They didn't shoot anyone or threaten anyone did they?
I never heard anyone say they want to overthrow the govt. Now that is illegal and punishable by the death penalty if I recall.
-
Careful Primemuscle, I fear guys like AJ are a few insults away from opening fire at the local White Castle.
We should not promote mental illness.
"Currently we have no White Castle in Baker County, OR listed in our directory. Please search White Castle in other locations." Or so it is written on the White Castle website store locator.
-
We just turn on the news for a few minutes and see 2000 blacks running through a mall causing mayhem and destruction like a scene straight out of Planet of the Apes and we know it's best to just avoid places where blacks go. It's a perfect analogy. Sorry I had to be the one to break the bad news to you. Even liberals joke about this when their fake black friends have left.
You thought I was unaware of ignorance until reading the post?
-
You thought I was unaware of ignorance until reading the post?
Strange and delusional perception you have there. When someone doesn't jump into the ocean because of sharks, we call them cautious or intelligent.
-
Strange and delusional perception you have there. When someone doesn't jump into the ocean because of sharks, we call them cautious or intelligent.
Niggas ain't sharks, SV.
-
I like the black/shark comparison.
Great Whites often ambush their prey, much like Hebrews like to sucker punch. Once blood is in the water, other sharks will flock to the scene for an easy meal (Hebrew fight).
j/k - I'm not a racist bigot.
-
I like the black/shark comparison.
Great Whites often ambush their prey, much like Hebrews like to sucker punch. Once blood is in the water, other sharks will flock to the scene for an easy meal (Hebrew fight).
j/k - I'm not a racist bigot.
You forgot dancing around like the Sharks and Jets from "West Side Story".
-
are we sure blacks aren't sharks? :D
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/T41EszzFY8g/hqdefault.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a5/Animorphs_15_The_Escape.jpg)
-
We just turn on the news for a few minutes and see 2000 blacks running through a mall causing mayhem and destruction like a scene straight out of Planet of the Apes and we know it's best to just avoid places where blacks go. It's a perfect analogy. Sorry I had to be the one to break the bad news to you. Even liberals joke about this when their fake black friends have left.
This is true though.
People walking on the sidewalk.
When they see blacks they cross the street.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Scientific_racism_irish.jpg)
-
This is true though.
People walking on the sidewalk.
When they see blacks they cross the street.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Scientific_racism_irish.jpg)
Don't forget to lock your car door when we walk by!!
-
Don't forget to lock your car door when we walk by!!
KFC and Watermelon thrown at said assailants could have prevented this.
-
KFC and Watermelon thrown at said assailants could have prevented this.
We'd start fighting each other!!
I'm getting Chic Fil A for lunch in your honor!
-
We'd start fighting each other!!
I'm getting Chic Fil A for lunch in your honor!
Just so you know, i don't regard you as the same as those hebrews, i've found you to be quite intelligent at times.
Not even once have i seen you use Obama-son/hood-lingo.
-
Just so you know, i don't regard you as the same as those hebrews, i've found you to be quite intelligent at times.
Not even once have i seen you use Obama-son/hood-lingo.
There were no Ebonics or southern lingo allowed or spoken in our house, LOL!
TBH, I do swear quite a bit conversationally but not at people, because it's rude.
-
There were no Ebonics or southern lingo allowed or spoken in our house, LOL!
TBH, I do swear quite a bit conversationally but not at people, because it's rude.
I swear at people. :(
-
Confirmed....white people. ;D
Warm blankets, snow pants, flour, French Vanilla Creamer, and Miracle Whip.
Family Fued question: "Name popular tems found in white people's homes?"
-
I swear at people. :(
I'll swear at friends jokingly.
-
I pepper moralistic anecdotes with oaths and expletives. This confuses the conversational victim.
-
I'll swear at friends jokingly.
I swear at everyone, constantly. Except grandma, she'll smack the fuck out of me.
-
I swear at everyone, constantly. Except grandma, she'll smack the fuck out of me.
Lemme guess,,, she smacks you in the ankles.
-
Militia spokesman shoves a bunch of shit off a table, following meltdown.
He's mad because people aren't sending the lotion and snacks and socks and jerky they requested.
Rather, people are mailing them dildos. Lots of them. Dude loses his shit here.
Video: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2016/01/12/bundy-militia-loses-it-over-bag-of-dks-video/
-
after realizing nobody gives an actual fvk... looks like they're giving up. I wonder how long until they face charges for property damage?
ORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — The armed activists occupying a national wildlife refuge in southeastern Oregon said Tuesday that they plan to hold a community meeting this week to explain themselves and inform residents when they will leave.
A member of the anti-government group told reporters that the meeting will be held Friday evening in Burns, 30 miles from the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, The Oregonian newspaper reported (http://bit.ly/1RK65f6 ).
Arizona rancher Robert "LaVoy" Finicum said the location has yet to be determined. He said "there should be a dialogue" but declined to give any specifics about the group's exit plans.
. . .
Ammon Bundy, the group's leader, has previously said the group would not leave until a plan was in place to turn over federal lands to local authorities. They also want the release of Dwight and Steven Hammond, father-and-son ranchers convicted of arson who returned to prison last week to serve longer sentences.
Read more: http://www.chron.com/news/science/article/Armed-group-calls-meeting-to-talk-with-Oregon-6753932.php
-
"Oppressed white farmers"...I didn't realize this thread was about white farmers in Zimbabwe and South Africa?.... :-X
-
How are they getting mail?
-
Militia spokesman shoves a bunch of shit off a table, following meltdown.
He's mad because people aren't sending the lotion and snacks and socks and jerky they requested.
Rather, people are mailing them dildos. Lots of them. Dude loses his shit here.
Video: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2016/01/12/bundy-militia-loses-it-over-bag-of-dks-video/
Lol haha
Form militia with lots of guns.
Forget to bring snacks.
;D
-
How are they getting mail?
They don't want to suspend ALL govt services when they overthrow the govt. Just the ones cutting into their profits
-
They don't want to suspend ALL govt services when they overthrow the govt. Just the ones cutting into their profits
What I meant was "how are they getting mail?". How is a group of people holed-up in a govt facility getting mail, posting on facebook, making videos, etc... Weren't they supposed to cut the power last week?
-
It's total generation selfie. They're not rugged badasses living off the land. They're Phil Heath fans, intentionally tweeting videos of themselves angrily throwing boxes of dildos. One faked being a vet. One got drunk off donation money. Who knows what else is going on there. It ain't exactly the founding fathers in there... It's everydAy low education angry armed folks squatting on lands and buildings they don't own, using a govt computer to try to slice up lands for their buddies.
-
after realizing nobody gives an actual fvk...
Except 240 who lives glued to his newsfeed waiting for updates about a few harmless crackers in some podunk village across the entire country from him.
-
Except 240 who lives glued to his newsfeed waiting for updates about a few harmless crackers in some podunk village across the entire country from him.
somehow I don't think they would be viewed as harmless by you if they were darker
-
somehow I don't think they would be viewed as harmless by you if they were darker
They would have been dead before it hit the news or he got a chance to form an opinion.
-
They would have been dead before it hit the news or he got a chance to form an opinion.
Reverse racism post reported to mods.
-
Reverse racism post reported to mods.
What if they were Native Americans demanding land back?
-
What if they were Native Americans demanding land back?
Shoot them, and claim they were hostile "Indians".
-
What if they were chinks? :o
-
What if they were chinks? :o
Shoot them, and claim they were hostile "Indians".
-
What if they were fat alcoholics that never even lifted??
Wait....
-
What if they were fat alcoholics that never even lifted??
Wait....
I would never advise suicide, Chaos.
PM me if you want to talk.
-
What if they were chinks? :o
Everybody'd be Kung Fu fighting!
-
Everybody'd be Kung Fu fighting!
What if, there were 3 chinks, 7 hebrews, 2 beaners, 3 crackers and 1 muzzie?
-
What if, there were 3 chinks, 7 hebrews, 2 beaners, 3 crackers and 1 muzzie?
The passengers of a Subway in NYC.
-
What if, there were 3 chinks, 7 hebrews, 2 beaners, 3 crackers and 1 muzzie?
Show them the way to Jerusalem and / or Nibiru
-
Show them the way to Jerusalem and / or Nibiru
Does Niburu take physical bodies or sprits?
If it's spirits, that would explain why some of my people act so fucked-up.
Speaking of Niburu.... Where's Wiggs been hiding? He could be busy with nursing school or sucked up by the planet without time to post a goodbye.
-
What if, there were 3 chinks, 7 hebrews, 2 beaners, and 1 muzzie?
So the bartender says: "Get the fuck outta here!"
-
Except 240 who lives glued to his newsfeed waiting for updates about a few harmless crackers in some podunk village across the entire country from him.
they're encouraging uprising against my nation's govt.
they're traitors. and they are sitting in a federal building with boxes of dildos. I don't know what is going on there.
-
They would have been dead before it hit the news or he got a chance to form an opinion.
Imagine 20 muslims with rifles taking over a federal building.
They wouldn't have to do anything else - we would have raided that place and smoked em out, and blasted them if they so much as blinked.
the problem is - if these cats aren't arrested, they'll do it again BIGGER next time.
-
Imagine 20 muslims with rifles taking over a federal building.
They wouldn't have to do anything else - we would have raided that place and smoked em out, and blasted them if they so much as blinked.
the problem is - if these cats aren't arrested, they'll do it again BIGGER next time.
20 Muslims wouldn't have the level of privilege necessary to survive the situation, LOL!
It's inevitable. The way it was handled encourages others to do the same thing and on a bigger scale.
The only thing that'll annoy me is people wont be able to admit poor handling of the situation further radicalized anti-govt groups.
-
Imagine 20 muslims with rifles taking over a federal building.
They wouldn't have to do anything else - we would have raided that place and smoked em out, and blasted them if they so much as blinked.
the problem is - if these cats aren't arrested, they'll do it again BIGGER next time.
Muslims don't take over buildings you fucking moron. They murder everyone in sight and then kill themselves. Somehow I think you'd have less of a problem with that.
-
Muslims don't take over buildings you fucking moron. They murder everyone in sight and then kill themselves. Somehow I think you'd have less of a problem with that.
i'm down for our cops wasting anyone that takes action to overthrow the US govt.
no matter their shade.
-
still hoping this thing drags on for months
Thank you, Oregon militiamen: The longer you stay, the more ridiculous you and the conservative movement look
When a group of self-declared militiamen raided and seized the federal buildings on the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in eastern Oregon, many on the left called for the federal government to immediately shut it down, even though the trespassers are well-armed and clearly eager to turn into martyrs for the incoherent right-wing cause they stand for.
So far, however, the government shows no interest in giving the militia the violent showdown they long for, instead seeming content to wait them out, secure in the knowledge that this particular bunch of idiots are not the hard asses they pretend to be and will likely get cold or bored and leave on their own soon enough, tails tucked neatly between their legs.
It turns out that this is the best possible decision federal authorities could have made. In fact, it’s increasingly clear that this clown show is, if anything, a huge gift to liberals.
http://www.salon.com/2016/01/14/thank_you_oregon_militiamen_the_longer_you_stay_the_more_ridiculous_you_and_the_conservative_movement_look/
-
Muslims don't take over buildings you fucking moron. They murder everyone in sight and then kill themselves. Somehow I think you'd have less of a problem with that.
StinkDick is right. Crackers, hebrews, chinks, beaners don't blow themselves up and kill everyone around them. Dunecoons on the other hand... :-\
-
StinkDick is right. Crackers, hebrews, chinks, beaners don't blow themselves up and kill everyone around them. Dunecoons on the other hand... :-\
Thanks brah. Appreciate the support. Means a lot.
-
it's true, whitey only commits jihadi terror at half the rate of dunecoons in the US however whitey is far and away the leader for other types of terrorism !
http://securitydata.newamerica.net/extremists/analysis.html
-
it's true, whitey only commits jihadi terror at half the rate of dunecoons in the US however whitey is far and away the leader for other types of terrorism !
http://securitydata.newamerica.net/extremists/analysis.html
Lol at the black guy citing statistics for crimes committed by race. Hilarious actually.
-
Lol at the black guy citing statistics for crimes committed by race. Hilarious actually.
you made the claim about terrorism not being committed by white people.
(https://www.rt.com/files/news/41/f3/e0/00/32456789.jpg)
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/tally-of-attacks-in-us-challenges-perceptions-of-top-terror-threat.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/16/opinion/the-other-terror-threat.html
haha what a hoot!
-
Are you counting Arabs as white? If not you should be. ;)
-
StinkDick is right. Crackers, hebrews, chinks, beaners don't blow themselves up and kill everyone around them. Dunecoons on the other hand... :-\
What race are people in the IRA?
-
Are you counting Arabs as white? If not you should be. ;)
Sad to admit but whitey commits deadly domestic terror at a scale that dwarfs arabs. Hell even torpedohead found a report that showed a good number of ISIS recruits are white. Authorities have known this for quite some time despite claims to the contrary.
-
the face of terror
(http://a.abcnews.com/images/GMA/abc_JoeStack_100222_mn.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b3/Joseph_Stack_in_Billy_Eli_Band.jpg)
(https://bostinx13.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/joseph-stack.jpg)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_suicide_attack
:D
-
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/two-teenage-girls-face-trial-in-colorado-for-planning-mass-school-shooting/ar-BBodbUy?ocid=spartanntp
-
Come to Chicago, took the dindu's exactly 2 hrs in to 2016 to murder someone. 110 people shot since Jan 1.
-
Come to Chicago, took the dindu's exactly 2 hrs in to 2016 to murder someone. 110 people shot since Jan 1.
Thanks to the efforts of the NRA its not possible to understand this problem.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2015/01/14/why-the-cdc-still-isnt-researching-gun-violence-despite-the-ban-being-lifted-two-years-ago/
-
Thanks to the efforts of the NRA its not possible to understand this problem.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2015/01/14/why-the-cdc-still-isnt-researching-gun-violence-despite-the-ban-being-lifted-two-years-ago/
Yeah and Chicago has probably the most restrictive guns laws in the country, yet usually leads the country in shootings.
-
Yeah and Chicago has probably the most restrictive guns laws in the country, yet usually leads the country in shootings.
said donald trump so we know thats probably not true
http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20151027/downtown/does-chicago-have-strictest-gun-laws-country-its-complicated
-
So the bartender says: "Get the fuck outta here!"
:D
-
What race are people in the IRA?
They're called "Black" Irish for a reason. ;D
-
Today, pranksters ordered a 55gallon drum of lube for the protesters.
Charming.
-
Oregon militants vow to ‘arrest’ county officials
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/whiny-oregon-militants-vow-to-arrest-county-officials-who-are-trying-to-shame-and-humiliate-them/
-
Today, pranksters ordered a 55gallon drum of lube for the protesters.
Charming.
That's very considerate of them.
It's going to be a long, cold winter.
Perhaps leaving them alive and allowing public shaming has a benefit. People wanting an excuse to buy bags of dicks, dildos, 55 gallon drums of lube, etc...are having some harmless fun.
-
said donald trump so we know thats probably not true
http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20151027/downtown/does-chicago-have-strictest-gun-laws-country-its-complicated
I don't give a fuck what trump says, I live in Illinois
-
the face of terror
(http://a.abcnews.com/images/GMA/abc_JoeStack_100222_mn.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b3/Joseph_Stack_in_Billy_Eli_Band.jpg)
(https://bostinx13.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/joseph-stack.jpg)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Austin_suicide_attack
:D
WTF is this? ???
-
I don't give a fuck what trump says, I live in Illinois
Travel restrictions would stop them from purchasing guns in more lenient states. :)
-
Travel restrictions would stop them from purchasing guns in more lenient states. :)
So whats your point? That these laws don't work? Wow I'm shocked........
-
So whats your point? That these laws don't work? Wow I'm shocked........
Do you believe more laws is the answer?
-
Do you believe more laws is the answer?
No, I believe the 2nd amendment says "shall not be infringed". besides guns aren't the problem, people are, perhaps a good culling is in order.
-
No, I believe the 2nd amendment says "shall not be infringed". besides guns aren't the problem, people are, perhaps a good culling is in order.
it also says that guns can be owned in a "well regulated Militia".....do you consider those guys occupying that Federal building to be "well-regulated"???? ;)
-
it also says that guns can be owned in a "well regulated Militia".....do you consider those guys occupying that Federal building to be "well-regulated"???? ;)
The militia is the American citizen. Doesn't matter if you agree with them or not.
-
WTF is this? ???
someone claimed that certain ethnic groups don't blow themselves up.
(http://img2-azcdn.newser.com/square-image/81491-20140204132513/joe-stacks-daughter-calls-him-a-hero.jpeg)
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/plane-crash-suspects-online-diatribe
-
The militia is the American citizen. Doesn't matter if you agree with them or not.
well here is where interpretation diverges....I would consider a well regulated Militia to be a citizen's group who owns guns BUT is organized in some sort of way......like the national guard for instance or some sort of group which can be called upon during times of crisis such as an invasion by a foreign power, to mobilize for protection......etc...I don't think the foundi fathers wanted guns in the hands of everyone...no questions asked.....
-
well here is where interpretation diverges....I would consider a well regulated Militia to be a citizen's group who owns guns BUT is organized in some sort of way......like the national guard for instance or some sort of group which can be called upon during times of crisis such as an invasion by a foreign power, to mobilize for protection......etc...I don't think the foundi fathers wanted guns in the hands of everyone...no questions asked.....
The United States had no standing army, so the citizens were the army. I really wish people would take some time to actually read the history of the US. Most of the artillery used in the Revolution was privately owned. Seems they didn't have a problem with citizens owning cannons
From 1791 to 1939, there was no restriction on what weapons you could own.
-
The United States had no standing army, so the citizens were the army. I really wish people would take some time to actually read the history of the US. Most of the artillery used in the Revolution was privately owned. Seems they didn't have a problem with citizens owning cannons
I barely trust the average cop with a gun, let alone a citizen with a cannon. :-X :-X :-X
-
AJ further outing his Kazan gimmick.
-
someone claimed that certain ethnic groups don't blow themselves up.
(http://img2-azcdn.newser.com/square-image/81491-20140204132513/joe-stacks-daughter-calls-him-a-hero.jpeg)
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/plane-crash-suspects-online-diatribe
Lol, sympathizer.
-
AJ further outing his Kazan gimmick.
Somewhere a village is missing their idiot......
-
Lol, sympathizer.
hey thanks for sharing that report because now we know 40% of ISIS are converts and a good chunk are white!
:o
-
hey thanks for sharing that report because now we know 40% of ISIS are converts and a good chunk are white!
:o
Just like you?
-
Just like you?
appreciate your efforts in bringing this material to light
-
Ammon Bundy arrested. One dead, one injured in shootout with feds.
FBI finally decided to arrest them while they were driving to a meeting with others to spread their national overthrow message.
BURNS- OREGON STANDOFF SPOKESMAN ROBERT 'LAVOY' FINICUM WAS KILLED AND OTHER LEADERS OF THE MALHEUR NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE OCCUPATION WERE ARRESTED TUESDAY AFTER THE FBI AND STATE POLICE STOPPED VEHICLES ABOUT 20 MILES NORTH OF BURNS. AUTHORITIES DID NOT RELEASE THE NAME OF THE PERSON WHO DIED AT THE HIGHWAY STOP, BUT FINCICUM'S DAUGHTER CONFIRMED IT WAS FINICUM, 55, OF CANE BEDS, ARIZONA ONE OF THE COWBOY-HAT WEARING FACES OF THE TAKEOVER. 'DAD WAS SUCH A GOOD MAN THROUGH AND THROUGH,' SAID ARIANA FINCICUM BROWN, 26, ONE OF FINCIUM'S 11 CHILDREN. 'HE WOULD NEVER WANT TO HURT SOMEBODY, BUT HE...
-
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/01/bundys-five-other-militants-arrested-after-police-confrontation-leaves-one-dead
Robert "LaVoy" Finicum, who's only source of income he had said was housing (9 to 11, depending on the report) foster children.
http://gawker.com/oregon-milita-spokesman-says-foster-children-were-remov-1753460681
-
Wish Janet Reno was still the AG. It never would have taken this long for one of these militia fucks to get theirs. Glad he's dead. Wish they'd have gotten Bundy too.
-
I don't know who is in the wrong here. I just hope nobody gets killed and justice prevails.
the man killed said on tv 3 weeks ago that he'd likely be killed. This was blue tarp guy, right? He was determined to shoot it out weeks ago.
-
:D
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CY8CqYTUMAIsA68.jpg)
-
Wish Janet Reno was still the AG. It never would have taken this long for one of these militia fucks to get theirs. Glad he's dead. Wish they'd have gotten Bundy too.
Yeah just kill anyone that doesn't get in line for .gov. fucking moron
-
Yeah just kill anyone that doesn't get in line for .gov. fucking moron
Dude!..I know you're really anti-gov ernment, but come on....these guys took over gov't property illegally, were armed to the teeth and stated openly they were going to engage in a firefight with the gov't if anyone tried to make them leave....they deserved what they got
-
(http://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BBoKR5w.img?h=624&w=624&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f)
-
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Pbxgn54qO-c/hqdefault.jpg)
(http://a.abcnews.go.com/images/US/AP_ryan_bundy_jef_160107_12x5_1600.jpg)
(http://image.oregonlive.com/home/olive-media/width960/img/oregonian/photo/2016/01/08/-2a4e554e903fd678.JPG)
-
(http://gdb.voanews.com/57202AE5-53FF-4E43-BA77-C936E3A6F0C8_w640_s.gif)
-
(http://thesource.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Susanne_Posel-Headline_News__Official-oregon_seize__building_ammon__bundy__ranch__oathkeepers_cspoa__ranchers_militia_domestic_terrorism_occupycorporat.jpg)
-
he told us weeks ago that he would use his gun if any law enforcement pointed a weapon at him.
BUT he said this while in the commission of a crime, and doing it while carrying a rifle. He had a delusional death with, and I honestly thought the guy was mentally handicapped when they were interviewing him. Sleeping in a chair under a tarp, in the rain, with a rifle... after breaking into a federal building and destroying cameras and using their computers to divide land and... drum roll please... running their campaign for overthrow of the US govt.
It's hard to feel pity for them.... they wanted to end our govt. WHat happens then? Our enemies slice up our nation and we're slaves to china, russia, etc. People don't think about that. You don't like illegals... WTF do you think happens when bundy overthrows the govt and the entire Border Patrol and depts of INS is disbanded?
-
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/01/bundys-five-other-militants-arrested-after-police-confrontation-leaves-one-dead
Robert "LaVoy" Finicum, who's only source of income he had said was housing (9 to 11, depending on the report) foster children.
http://gawker.com/oregon-milita-spokesman-says-foster-children-were-remov-1753460681
Fine, upstanding patriot. Taken too soon. :'(
-
(http://thesource.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Susanne_Posel-Headline_News__Official-oregon_seize__building_ammon__bundy__ranch__oathkeepers_cspoa__ranchers_militia_domestic_terrorism_occupycorporat.jpg)
lol at the black gloves. :D :D
-
Dude!..I know you're really anti-gov ernment, but come on....these guys took over gov't property illegally, were armed to the teeth and stated openly they were going to engage in a firefight with the gov't if anyone tried to make them leave....they deserved what they got
Read what has come out so far - "we don't know who shot first", really? Just because you don't agree with these guys or what their cause is, saying they "got what they deserved" is ridiculous. If no shots were fired by the Bundy crew yet one of them is dead, you find that acceptable
-
Read what has come out so far - "we don't know who shot first", really? Just because you don't agree with these guys or what their cause is, saying they "got what they deserved" is ridiculous. If no shots were fired by the Bundy crew yet one of them is dead, you find that acceptable
what if LE told them to put down their weapons and instead of complying they pointed their weapons at LE
Isn't the guy who got shot the same guy under the blue tarp who was on the record saying he would never surrender or go to jail. The dude was begging for suicide by cop on TV
-
this fucking idiot , watched to many clint eastwood movies i bet
(http://s3media.247sports.com/Uploads/Assets/625/255/1255625.gif)
(http://assets.rollingstone.com/assets/2016/media/223227/_original/1452201822/1035x690-h_14747281.jpg)
-
Read what has come out so far - "we don't know who shot first", really? Just because you don't agree with these guys or what their cause is, saying they "got what they deserved" is ridiculous. If no shots were fired by the Bundy crew yet one of them is dead, you find that acceptable
I wish you were this fervent when its unarmed blacks being shot :D
-
LOL Fat boy
-
I wish you were this fervent when its unarmed blacks being shot :D
I really don't care who is getting shot, if .gov is gunning down Americans for no just cause, we have a real problem.
-
what if LE told them to put down their weapons and instead of complying they pointed their weapons at LE
Isn't the guy who got shot the same guy under the blue tarp who was on the record saying he would never surrender or go to jail. The dude was begging for suicide by cop on TV
Well we don't know now do we? Back to my point, Americans being shot by .gov, and the best we get it a "we don't know who fired first"?
-
Well we don't know now do we? Back to my point, Americans being shot by .gov, and the best we get it a "we don't know who fired first"?
This is why Militias are dangerous ;D
-
This is why Militias are dangerous ;D
OK, so I see that the .gov programming of militias being a bunch of unhinged rednecks has worked.
-
Well we don't know now do we? Back to my point, Americans being shot by .gov, and the best we get it a "we don't know who fired first"?
that's why I said "What If"
what if LE told them to put down their weapons and instead of complying they pointed their weapons at LE
Isn't the guy who got shot the same guy under the blue tarp who was on the record saying he would never surrender or go to jail. The dude was begging for suicide by cop on TV
-
OK, so I see that the .gov programming of militias being a bunch of unhinged rednecks has worked.
Instead of "militias", call them gangs and people will be sympathetic.
-
Instead of "militias", call them gangs and people will be sympathetic.
Or Dindu Nuffins and people will be outraged.
-
Or Dindu Nuffins and people will be outraged.
They'd be dead with their faces plastered on 'dindu nuffin muffins' weeks ago, if black. :)
My imagination isn't vivid enough to come up with how gun nuts here would react to an armed "Black Militia" taking over any Govt facility. To be honest, the thought of their reaction makes me giddy but I can't imagine how extreme it would be and the degree of rhetoric.
-
They'd be dead with their faces plastered on 'dindu nuffin muffins' weeks ago, if black. :)
My imagination isn't vivid enough to come up with how gun nuts here would react to an armed "Black Militia" taking over any Govt facility. To be honest, the thought of their reaction makes me giddy but I can't imagine how extreme it would be and the degree of rhetoric.
Well, I'm a gun nut according to some, but even I thought these guys should have been Waco'd weeks ago.
By day 2 to be precise.
Black or white would have been the same to me. This is just ridiculous.
-
Instead of "militias", call them gangs and people will be sympathetic.
I agree with this
-
Well, I'm a gun nut according to some, but even I thought these guys should have been Waco'd weeks ago.
By day 2 to be precise.
Black or white would have been the same to me. This is just ridiculous.
I agree but I guess if they were taken out right away, in their paranoia they would have said that it occurred due to a direct order from Obama and then they would have used it to recruit...LOL...I can see it now...."look what this black president is doing to us white folk"
-
I agree but I guess if they were taken out right away, in their paranoia they would have said that it occurred due to a direct order from Obama and then they would have used it to recruit...LOL...I can see it now...."look what this black president is doing to us white folk"
They'd think he was getting revenge for fallen black youth, LOL!
I can't even imagine the reactions from people here. We'd need a new word created for because "butthurt" would never be adequate.
-
Well, I'm a gun nut according to some, but even I thought these guys should have been Waco'd weeks ago.
By day 2 to be precise.
Black or white would have been the same to me. This is just ridiculous.
Really? So the police\FBI get to be judge, jury, and executioner?
-
They'd think he was getting revenge for fallen black youth, LOL!
I can't even imagine the reactions from people here. We'd need a new word created for because "butthurt" would never be adequate.
HAHAHA!!!!!....I love that line!....GOOD JOB!....sad but true
-
Some witnesses saying he had his hands up when he was shot in the face.
I fully expect white riots and "Hands up, don't shoot" to be a tshirt slogan for a new movement, #Whitelivesmatter
-
Some witnesses saying he had his hands up when he was shot in the face.
I fully expect white riots and "Hands up, don't shoot" to be a tshirt slogan for a new movement, #Whitelivesmatter
not really...whites believe everything the police say....so its a non-issue
-
not really...whites believe everything the police say....so its a non-issue
Unless it's one of our own.
-
not really...whites believe everything the police say....so its a non-issue
Not me. :D :D
-
they immediately put on 2 witnesses saying he was armed and charging police, to cut off this statement.
I don't know who is lying... both sides (police and squatters) are capable of lies and bullshit. These dudes want to overthrow our govt, they'd have no problem lying. This dude did say for 3 weeks that he was going out in a blaze of glory, he wanted that shit. but the FBI, sure, they'd lie too, no doubt.
-
Republicans ::)
-
they immediately put on 2 witnesses saying he was armed and charging police, to cut off this statement.
I don't know who is lying... both sides (police and squatters) are capable of lies and bullshit. These dudes want to overthrow our govt, they'd have no problem lying. This dude did say for 3 weeks that he was going out in a blaze of glory, he wanted that shit. but the FBI, sure, they'd lie too, no doubt.
The guy was on the record saying he had no intention of surrending or being arrested
In the first video he says exactly what he will do if someone points a gun and him and he says he's serious (and he certainly seems serious)
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/oregon-occupier-lavoy-finicum-warns-fbi-he-d-take-death-n491056
-
Hows that Freedom working out for him this afternoon?
-
HAHAHA!!!!!....I love that line!....GOOD JOB!....sad but true
They'd also find great irony in blacks protesting for more welfare subsidies.
-
sorry to hear the sad news
-
(https://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/aworldincrisis/files/2012/04/7374820-oppression-just-ahead-green-road-sign-with-dramatic-storm-clouds-and-sky.jpg)
(http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/file.php?40,file=85202,filename=fat-militia.jpg)
(http://journalofdoubt.net/jodwp/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Fatty7.jpg)
(http://journalofdoubt.net/jodwp/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Fatty8.jpg)
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y218/Shatner556/airsoft14.jpg)
(https://defensivetraininggroup.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/fat-tac2.jpg)
-
Yeah just kill anyone that doesn't get in line for .gov. fucking moron
Need a tissue, pussy?
-
Need a tissue, pussy?
Why would I need a tissue, coprophagiac.
-
Not for nuthin', but he was kind of a big target.
-
(http://journalofdoubt.net/jodwp/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Fatty7.jpg)
(http://journalofdoubt.net/jodwp/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Fatty8.jpg)
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y218/Shatner556/airsoft14.jpg)
(https://defensivetraininggroup.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/fat-tac2.jpg)
Are they serious?
I suppose they hope the enemy will laugh himself to death?
-
Gentle Farmer
(http://www.nmessences.com/story_images/peter_child2.jpg)
-
Why would I need a tissue, coprophagiac.
To dab your asshole, you butthurt bitch.
-
(https://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/aworldincrisis/files/2012/04/7374820-oppression-just-ahead-green-road-sign-with-dramatic-storm-clouds-and-sky.jpg)
(http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/file.php?40,file=85202,filename=fat-militia.jpg)
(http://journalofdoubt.net/jodwp/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Fatty7.jpg)
(http://journalofdoubt.net/jodwp/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Fatty8.jpg)
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y218/Shatner556/airsoft14.jpg) How come the majority of these mental midget freedome fighters look like they are inbred and overfed?
(https://defensivetraininggroup.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/fat-tac2.jpg)
-
There are more than a few Getbiggers who post about wanting to overthrow the government and yet when a group/militia takes a position against government action, Getbiggers do not support them or their actions. ::)
You can't have it both ways.
-
(http://journalofdoubt.net/jodwp/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Fatty7.jpg)
(http://journalofdoubt.net/jodwp/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Fatty8.jpg)
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y218/Shatner556/airsoft14.jpg)
(https://defensivetraininggroup.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/fat-tac2.jpg)
Look at those battle hardened operators..
-
Really? So the police\FBI get to be judge, jury, and executioner?
When you take a stance that you know can possibly end in this scenario, you are making a decision.
Whether it's right or wrong isn't the question. It's simply a fact that if they didn't leave of their own accord, this would be the inevitable outcome.
-
They'd also find great irony in blacks protesting for more welfare subsidies.
you're on a roll :D
-
the new leader
-
Sad that so many sheeple are so well trained by the government to be subservient.
-
tarp rifle guy wanted to be a martyr. He said it weeks ago. He wanted to die for his cause, and they let him.
nobody is shocked here. long-term suicide by cop. I bet it wasn't as romantic and beautiful as he imagined.
this whole oregon takeover made them all look like shit. knocking tables full of dildoes over, and screaming about 55 gallon tubs of lube... unreal.
-
this guy seems pretty rational
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/meet-oregons-new-militiaman-leader
-
To dab your asshole, you butthurt bitch.
Anytime, anywhere dickhead
-
When you take a stance that you know can possibly end in this scenario, you are making a decision.
Whether it's right or wrong isn't the question. It's simply a fact that if they didn't leave of their own accord, this would be the inevitable outcome.
Sorry but I do not agree, it has become apparent that the police are trigger happy. From what little information I can find, no shots were fired by the deceased. An account from someone in the vehicle claims he had his hands up when he was shot, so if you don't see a problem with this or the numerous other cases of police killing civilians.........
-
Sorry but I do not agree, it has become apparent that the police are trigger happy. From what little information I can find, no shots were fired by the deceased. An account from someone in the vehicle claims he had his hands up when he was shot, so if you don't see a problem with this or the numerous other cases of police killing civilians.........
I really don't in this instance.
Often times I do... White/Black... whatever. I have seen numerous times where I've been on the side of the victims because I too believe police have been as you put it "trigger happy", but in this instance. I can not say so.
This started on January 2nd.
So 25 days ago, a group of people went into a federal building and refused to leave.
25 days before anyone got hurt or shot. Trigger happy doesn't seem to fit this considering law enforcement waited ALMOST a month to even take any action what so ever.
Sorry, but no... The guy had 24 days he could have gone home, but chose to keep on being where he wasn't supposed to be.
No one to blame but himself.
-
Would it have taken 25 days if the occupiers were african american, middle eastern or any pigmentation other than white?
-
Would it have taken 25 days if the occupiers were african american, middle eastern or any pigmentation other than white?
(http://theblacksphere.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/White-Privilege-AMEX.jpg)
-
Would it have taken 25 days if the occupiers were african american, middle eastern or any pigmentation other than white?
Nobody knows, none of those groups can be together for 25 days without killing each other.
-
Nobody knows, none of those groups can be together for 25 days without killing each other.
True statement here.
-
this guy seems pretty rational
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/meet-oregons-new-militiaman-leader
If what this guy is saying is try, that's pretty crazy. You gotta love how the government uses "terrorism" laws.
Won't do shit about real terrorists, throws the book at ranchers.
-
so, who gives them the right to burn land that isn't theirs to burn ???
-
so, who gives them the right to burn land that isn't theirs to burn ???
The constitutional fatbody in the video was acting like that is a common practice.
-
i saw the dude on the news screaming about killing feds. fck that guy. It's one thing to dislike what the govt does - you sue for video, you get a ten million dollar settlement if they have wronged you, then you use the $ to run for office and prosecute bad cops. You don't pick up weapons and start wasting govt employees.
I read the ten or so remaining protesters are scared shitless. Then I saw this idiot hiding behind the yellow bulldozer talking about shooting feds. Not bright. If they wanted him dead, he'd be dead. He was probably in a snipers scope while making this ranting video.
-
i saw the dude on the news screaming about killing feds. fck that guy. It's one thing to dislike what the govt does - you sue for video, you get a ten million dollar settlement if they have wronged you, then you use the $ to run for office and prosecute bad cops. You don't pick up weapons and start wasting govt employees.
I read the ten or so remaining protesters are scared shitless. Then I saw this idiot hiding behind the yellow bulldozer talking about shooting feds. Not bright. If they wanted him dead, he'd be dead. He was probably in a snipers scope while making this ranting video.
::)
-
i saw the dude on the news screaming about killing feds. fck that guy. It's one thing to dislike what the govt does - you sue for video, you get a ten million dollar settlement if they have wronged you, then you use the $ to run for office and prosecute bad cops. You don't pick up weapons and start wasting govt employees.
I read the ten or so remaining protesters are scared shitless. Then I saw this idiot hiding behind the yellow bulldozer talking about shooting feds. Not bright. If they wanted him dead, he'd be dead. He was probably in a snipers scope while making this ranting video.
Yea they say that this is probably the only person still in there
i surprise this fat fuck can stand living 26? 27? days without fastfood
-
Yea they say that this is probably the only person still in there
i surprise this fat fuck can stand living 26? 27? days without fastfood
LMAO at the remix!! ;D ;D
-
Nobody knows, none of those groups can be together for 25 days without killing each other.
seems its the same with whites since the last statistics show that 83% of whites are killed by OTHER whites 8)
-
Can you even imagine the remix that would happen if they hooked-up with Sweet Honey Brown?
-
-
seems its the same with whites since the last statistics show that 83% of whites are killed by OTHER whites 8)
And yet whites aren't all over tv crying about it. 8)
-
And yet whites aren't all over tv crying about it. 8)
Maybe that's because whites aren't being killed by cops. Nice false equivalency.
-
Maybe that's because whites aren't being killed by cops. Nice false equivalency.
Apparently you've never checked the stats. :)
-
Maybe that's because whites aren't being killed by cops. Nice false equivalency.
No, it's because they're too busy working. ;)
-
Oppressed hillbillies of peace
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--Us2kG6qK--/xl6awhcinusn9g7sitne.jpg)
-
Oppressed hillbillies of peace
(http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--Us2kG6qK--/xl6awhcinusn9g7sitne.jpg)
Why Is that one dudes face retarded?
-
Groink lookin beefy, rockin the goatee. 8)
-
new FBI video shows the shot man reaching for his waistband. looks like, after weeks of saying he'd be killed by the feds, he chose to run at them while acting like he had a gun in his waistband. ???
-
-
LoL
So the feds pulled them over,
They took off on a high speed race until they reached the road block before they almost ran over a fed on fhe snow
He then gets out and reaches into his denium jacket / waistband , seems he couldnt decide to pull out his fully loaded gun or raise his hands , fucking redneck
-
#HandsUPdontShoot,JustKidding3x
-
#HandsUPdontShoot,JustKidding3x
-
this guy ,vermin-cum ??? , with that kind of draw, he would of surely made doc holliday his huckleberry
(https://bamfstyle.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/tstone-main1.jpg)
-
where's the peanut gallery now to howl over this dead terrorist?
-
Ok, when I read about the guy complaining about the box of dildos he received on video and throwing them off the table I started suspecting this was a Psyop to make conservatives look bad. I mean, why would he even acknowledge those packages? The smart thing to do would have been to keep quiet about it and not make themselves look like a fucking joke. Just too convenient and stupid.
-
The last idiots now on the phone live streaming on Youtube , wont go out alive he said , he is ready to go to war with America :D
(https://images.washingtonpost.com/?op=resize&url=https://s3.amazonaws.com/wapopartners.com/wweek-wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/02165723/news3_frymalheur_AmandaPeacher_4214.jpg&mode=crop&w=600&h=450&q=99)
(http://media.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/photo/2016/01/12/david-fry-29def0b7a36aabed.jpg)
-
He said he isn't even christian , he is a JEW and wants pizza and Marijuana to be sent in to continue his negotiation :D
(http://www.thesmokersclub.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/menorah-580x580.jpg)
-
(http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/universosteven/images/b/b0/Baja-vi%C3%B1eta-fin.gif/revision/latest?cb=20150408222843&path-prefix=es)
-
Psyop...
-
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2016/02/cleveland-tamir-rice-bill/462354/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2016/02/cleveland-tamir-rice-bill/462354/)
Cleveland Sues Tamir Rice's Family for Ambulance Fees
The city has filed a suit demanding $500 in payment for emergency treatment for the boy after a police officer fatally shot him.
lol. "clean up your mess...."
-
#snacklivesmatter