Exactly. These ranchers have more incentive to preserve this land than anyone. Its their livelyhood. And metropolitan bureaucrats and liberal journalists who don't know shit are actually trying to convince people they are destroying the land they depend upon for shits and giggles. It's such an asinine concept with no logical motive, but apparently its an easy narrative to spoon feed city-dwelling know-it-alls. Would hate to spoil a Portlander's afternoon picnic in the wind-swept Malheur high desert, though. It's their right to use the land just like the ranchers. Mine, mine, mine.
Pull your head out of your ass. These guys fucking sucked. They were domestic terrorists. Imagine how the same situation would have played out if they weren't white guys.
What about the sportsmen and hunters that live there and also use the land? Are their rights any less than the Hammonds? What about the other ranchers who may not agree with everything the BLM is doing but comply with the agreement and do not do illegal acts? This is not some liberal vs conservative thing. Lots of local conservatives in that area do not support the bullshit that the Hammonds did for years.
What the fuck does this whole thing have to do with immigration? We are talking about white dudes who raised arms against the USA. Your only argument is to talk shit about Mexicans? Fucking pathetic.
Yeah read pages 1-7 of this thread where we argued in depth about the poorly though blanket statements you just presented.
I would rather look at the real evidence of what happened. Even local conservative law enforcement people agree: The former official, who self-identifies as right of center politically, said it is "ridiculous and disgraceful that the commander in chief is now providing those who break the law with what will be interpreted as a rallying cry for future unlawful action." Fuck these guys. Are you too fucking stupid to realize how asinine you are being?
Ok what about them? The Hammonds were turned into arsonists under an obscure terrorism law because they refused to sell their land to expand the refuge. They were being railroaded by the government and being given maximum penalties for minimal crimes. Everyone has the right to public land, that is fantastic. When the government starts deciding people's private land is going to be made public then they tend to get pissed. See how you feel when they decide to put the interstate through your front yard.
I'm not defending anyone taking over public property. They were wrong. I am a law abiding citizen thats getting tired of all the polarization thats going on. And I'm not talking shit about any race man, only those who break our laws and kill without conscience. To me it doesn't matter what ones politics are, or race or religion, but if anyone or any organization breaks the fucking there should be penalties.
And now you understand how black people are treated daily. Yet, people freak the fuck out when they take a knee during the national anthem. But, oppose the government, occupy a federal building, take up arms against them? All good!
Paint a klan hood on someone elses face dude. I haven't said anything to warrant that response. Your just posturing like a douchebag. Sorry you're cranky but you don't get to run around calling people racists because they disagree with your opinion on a totally different subject. Drink a juice box and take a fucking nap.
I never said blacks don't get unfair treatment by the judicial system, I know they do alot of the time. I never said the Malheur protesters actions were "all good", they weren't. I never even remotely expressed an opinion on kneeling during the national anthem, that was just irrelevant. I question the label of "domestic terrorist" when applied to those protesters, that's pretty much it. All that other shit is just things you made up and pretended I think or said so you could justify getting all puffed up.
That's not what happened. You are normally one of the more fair minded ones in conversations like these so I don't think it's intentional but there is much your post that is just not factual. The refuge said the Hammonds had to stop grazing cattle on refuge land. The refuge did not try and take the Hammond's land.
In Oregon we have mandatory minimum sentences for violent felonies. It is a complicated law that has been adjusted some over the years. Sometimes judges apply the wrong sentence, some not to long, some not long enough. When that happens the sentence is appealed and the person convicted is resentanced correctly. This happens from time to time in Oregon. The Hammonds had something similar happen to them only on a federal level.
