Originally posted by Surtur
Though I am confused about what exactly these people are standing up for and why they think occupying this building will change anything?It said this was over the right to grazing or something. Or is this a response to a judge deciding to toss them back into jail? Since to me once your time is served that is it.
It also sets a dangerous precedent if a judge can decide "well the punishment wasn't enough we need more". They shouldn't be additionally punished because the last judge was too stupid to properly sentence them.
Continued prosecution by the government over grazing, criminal prosecution by the government for burning bad vegetation that is killing their animals and land seizures.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I disagree.
That's a shame, because it makes you wrong. Individual citizens, or even groups of citizens, don't get to just do whatever they please because they own guns and pay taxes.
You don't like the way something is done? You try and get other citizens to vote on it. You get signatures for a referendum. You call your local congressman.
Now, I happen to agree that making those two ranchers go back to prison is a shitty thing to do. Mandatory sentencing laws are bullshit, but that doesn't give people the right to threaten violence and take over property.
Originally posted by Tzeentch
So if I take a rifle and gun down a dozen police officers outside today you would assert that I'm justified and just exercising my rights?
You're half black and half Mexican. According to god fearing 'Muricans, that makes you the worst thing ever.
Originally posted by Time-ImmemorialWait, so you're allowed to use guns to intimidate government people into giving into your demands because 2nd amendment, but if you actually use those guns it's terrorism?
You are killing people, so that is against the law.Don't get upset now and throw a fit because your OP was trolling.
Ironically you have no problem with Black Lives matter and all the actual chaos they have caused.
Shows your true colors.
Do you know what the definition of terrorism is?
Originally posted by Luciusallahu akbar
That's a shame, because it makes you wrong. Individual citizens, or even groups of citizens, don't get to just do whatever they please because they own guns and pay taxes.You don't like the way something is done? You try and get other citizens to vote on it. You get signatures for a referendum. You call your local congressman.
Now, I happen to agree that making those two ranchers go back to prison is a shitty thing to do. Mandatory sentencing laws are bullshit, but that doesn't give people the right to threaten violence and take over property.
You're half black and half Mexican. According to god fearing 'Muricans, that makes you the worst thing ever.
Originally posted by Tzeentch
Wait, so you're allowed to use guns to intimidate government people into giving into your demands because 2nd amendment, but if you actually use those guns it's terrorism?Do you know what the definition of terrorism is?
Your only goal here is to cause a divisive argument. No one else but you has labeled this as terrorism. You have repeatedly sided with black lives matter, and actual terrorist organization that entices violence against the police and government. Black lives matters shuts city streets down, stops business from operating, turns over police cars and in the past has encouraged violent protests.
But you don't care about that because you are black.
So what you did was find a white issue where people are standing up for their rights in a peaceful way and have not hurt anyone and you want to call them terrorists.
You are mad at white people, when you should be mad at Obama for causing and encouraging black lives matter.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Continued prosecution by the government over grazing, criminal prosecution by the government for burning bad vegetation that is killing their animals and land seizures.
If there are plants that are literally killing their animals and they rely on these animals to make a living..I honestly don't see why there would even be a question of whether or not the vegetation should be destroyed..of course it should.
Why is it the government can't even do simple things? Unless this animal killing vegetation is also secretly some kind of cash crop.
They have imprisoned a bunch of people because of this.
Funny none of the black lives matter leaders are in prison for enciting violence against police and private citizens.
The bottom line here is this is people vs government.
The only reason liberals here have a problem with it is because its white conservatives doing it. They give zero ****s if black liberals rise up like black lives matter because they are liberal and black, so it does not count.
Originally posted by Surtur
For what reasons does the government say these animal killing plants shouldn't be destroyed? Do they just not believe they are harmful?As for the rest and people inciting riots..didn't Michael Brown's father at one point say "burn this place down" or something?
Because technically the land is on federal ground, and even though they have paid for the grazing rights on that federal land, now the go ole govy says burning the bad vegetation is agains the law.
Typical liberal bullshit.
Originally posted by Surtur
For what reasons does the government say these animal killing plants shouldn't be destroyed? Do they just not believe they are harmful?As for the rest and people inciting riots..didn't Michael Brown's father at one point say "burn this place down" or something?
Yes it was browns father who basically started that crap, of coarse he served no jail time because technically that is freedom of speech. Liberals will stand up for those rights because he is black, but if the person is white, lynch them. I am starting to wonder if liberals are more racist then conservatives.