Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 05:09am PT
|
I wonder why the Hammonds were never charged with poaching? Was this guide or other witnesses not considered reliable?
They are never charged with that crime, which in my view is far worse than burning 140 acres of scrub, yet it gets repeatedly brought up in the trial (though thrown out), its brought up in the grazing docs, and its even brought up in some propaganda letter peneed by the acting US Attny (the previous one having been fired for inappropriate sexting messages to her colleagues).
Did this hunting guide ever call in the poaching? Did it ever get investigated? Did that hunting guide (who admitted was on the border between Hammond land and public have an issue with the Hammonds? Maybe the wildlife preferred to stay on private property, the guide was butt hurt over his lack of opportunities since the Hammonds didn't give him acces?
Hmmm, I wonder... Let's just make stuff up so that this claim of arson sticks better.
The Hammonds were convicted of a crime by a jury using a statue that had previously been dressed up for use in Terrorists cases. And they used years old witness accounts of poaching to try and trump up the claim they burned the property on purpose.
Get a map, chart out the land owned by the Hammonds and the surrounding property owner/s. Come to your own conclusion, I already have. And it has nothing to do with the retards that took over the duck ponds.
|
|
monolith
climber
state of being
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 06:04am PT
|
WTF are you talking about Lorenzo?
That summary had nothing to do with proving the guide didn't know the difference between an elk or a deer.
Seriously, Lorenzo, you've got a reading comprehension problem.
Escopeta, are you still claiming the guide didn't know the difference between an elk and a deer?
During the jury deliberations, the Hammonds negotiated a deal where all the other charges were dropped and that the prosecuter would recommend the minimum sentence for arson on federal land. Sucks for you, but that's the way our system works.
|
|
franky
Trad climber
Black Hills, SD
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 06:30am PT
|
Here you go. My analysis of the evidence available on the internet suggests 5 years is possibly reasonable it could be more or less than I would suggest if i had seen the trial, but not having seen the trial I won't jump to any conclusions.
http://wildfiretoday.com/2016/01/05/the-timeline-for-the-oregon-rancher-arsonists/
Is your last post implying there is some land grab going on? Find one example of a federal agency acquiring a significant chunk of western private land by a means other than paying a willing seller a fair market price, or a consensual land swap. I bet you can't.
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 07:15am PT
|
Is your last post implying there is some land grab going on? Find one example of a federal agency acquiring a significant chunk of western private land by a means other than paying a willing seller a fair market price, or a consensual land swap. I bet you can't.
I'm not implying anything. I'm flatly stating that I have absolutely no doubt that there was/is a land grab going on.
In order to accept your challenge, we would need MUCH further definition on the term "willing seller".
Because if you mean a willing seller, that has been harassed, cajoled, threatened, gone broke trying to defend spurious claims by a government with unlimited legal resources and funds and otherwise forced to sell, then by all means you're correct.
|
|
jonnyrig
climber
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 07:31am PT
|
http://www.npr.org/2016/01/31/465000760/the-federal-response-to-oregon-occupation-may-have-roots-in-ruby-ridge
You know, I never did much follow a lot of these situations. I do, however, see a number of problems with the way law enforcement and our criminal justice systems work in this country.
First of all, it's not about justice. It's simply about having the opportunity to fight for your freedom in court. The basic premise is that the two parties arguing out the case in court will illuminate the truth. Problem is, that system works heavily in favor of the party with bigger pockets, be it the government or the individual whom the government is prosecuting.
Secondly, when it comes to law enforcement, they are often heavy-handed. No? Well, how many people just on this forum have bitched about being tooled? We put a lot of power into the hands of individuals, quite often without oversight and accountability. Sometimes it goes to their heads. Sometimes they make mistakes, which people are prone to make. In both cases, the system is biased toward law enforcement. Did you know over ninety percent of cases get plea-bargained?
https://www.bja.gov/Publications/PleaBargainingResearchSummary.pdf
How many of those cases do you think could be innocent, and either don't have the resources to fight, or are scared of the consequence of losing? Read the paper... those who fight and lose often receive harsher penalties than those who plea-bargain out. That's f*#ked.
And third, the public generally assumes guilt of all those who are arrested. Take the Hammonds, for instance. Many of you are guilty of simply assuming they are actually guilty of poaching. Seriously, with all the data on the unreliability of eye-witness accounts, the long passage of time since their alleged crime took place, and the questionable state of the witness... THIS is the part you assume to be true? This alone speaks volumes about the state of the public mindset when it comes to criminal law and justice.
Just as a final note, I'd like to take issue with the militias and their choice of activism. They keep picking losers and issues where the evidence is against them. WTF is wrong with them? Pick a worthy cause to stand up for. Maybe an unarmed black kid who got shot by the police in some truly heinous act of aggression, perhaps? Or don't you believe in justice? Maybe stand up for true freedom of speech or freedom of religion? You know, don't cover up the signs of the protesters who think you're full of sh#t?
No, instead they keep touting guns, cows, and Christian faith. They keep picking people who have already lost the fight in court. And they pick the wrong way of going about it. Instead of supporting better defense by way of exposing injustices through legal means, they take over a f*#king federal building (thus committing federal crimes in the process) and then essentially BRAG about it on public media. Seriously? Can you say "stupid"? (hint: it's two syllables)
Now, even having VIEWED video evidence of the take-down of Finecum, the Pacific Patriots Network has issued a "call to action" to protest events. Tell me, do you think they'd support my freedom of speech to call them out on being incapable of interpreting the video?
http://www.pacificpatriotsnetwork.com/
OFFICIAL CALL TO ACTION
Update: January 29, 2016
In light of the events that have taken place in Harney County, Oregon over the last two days, the official Pacific Patriots Network statement is as follows:
PPN condemns the violent action taken by the Harney County Sheriff's Department along with the FBI in the shooting death of Mr. Lavoy Finicum.
PPN condemns the violent action taken by the Harney County Sheriff's Department along with the FBI in the execution of arrests associated with the people at the Malhuer National Wildlife Refuge occupation.
PPN condemns the DISHONEST tactics used to arrest Jason Patrick on January 28th. Mr. Patrick's safety, well being and emotional state were compromised when the FBI lied not only to Mr. Patrick but to PPN representatives trying to assist with the PEACEFUL removal of people at the MNWR. The FBI stated to Mr. Patrick and the PPN that he was “free to go.” Mr. Patrick walked 7 miles in sub freezing temperatures only to be arrested at the checkpoint north of the Narrows.
PPN condemns the false statements given to the public by the FBI, Harney County Sheriff's Department and the Harney County officials.
IN RESPONSE TO THESE EVENTS, PACIFIC PATRIOTS NETWORK
IS ISSUING A
CALL TO ACTION
Calling on any and all Americans to come to Burns, Oregon to come to the aid of the American people standing against these violent, malicious and deceitful tactics. Come stand together with other Americans, and express our Constitutional right to PEACEFULLY assemble and air our grievances.
This operation will demand the following:
 Immediate detention by Oregon State Police of the FBI special agent in charge along with all agents and LEO involved in the shooting death of Lavoy Finicum. A first hand eyewitness account presents reasonable cause for arrest while the investigation takes place.
Immediate removal of all militarized FBI personnel and equipment from Harney County. All State and County Law Enforcement officers are not included and requested to stay and assist in the process to keep the peace.
Immediate resignation of Judge Steve Grasty, Sheriff David Ward, County commissioner Pete Runnels, and County commissioner Dan Nichols.
In order to successfully accomplish our mission, we will need any and all Americans to PEACEFULLY assemble within Burns, Oregon immediately. The success of this mission depends fully on the number of people that will come to PEACEFULLY stand and demand the items above be initiated.
A letter of intent will be legally served on the FBI special agent in charge at the time of Lavoy Finicum's death, Judge Steven Grasty, Sheriff David Ward, Dan Nichols and Pete Runnels by January 29th, 2016. We will request to escort the FBI presence out of Harney County, Oregon and once complete, the attention will return to the resignation of the County elected officials.
PPN is dedicated to a PEACEFUL operation. If you have any ill intent, please do not come. We do not need you. Please come prepared with civilian attire and adhere to the policy of no long guns within the community.
Please come self sufficient and able to care for yourself for the time you plan to stay. Donations arrive daily but they are not sustainable for a large or lengthy contingency.
We ask that you email us at volunteer@pacificpatriotsnetwork.comg if and when you are planning to come and stand in Burns, Oregon |
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 07:56am PT
|
"I try not to think about them at all," Roderick says. "I mean, all they had to do was show up at court. Very simply, that's all they had to do. I think again more about Bill Degan and his family, his two boys, his widow. You know, his mom and dad. That's who I think about."
SMH And all they needed to do was receive a summons that had the right date on it.
"They were apocalyptic Christians who believed the world was about to end. And they began practicing a form of religion called Christian identity, which is the religion of skinheads and white supremacists."
And yet, they weren't White Supremacists, or Skinheads. Funny how that isn't mentioned. Kind of like implying that the Hammonds are poachers. No proof but as long as it throws shade on them, its all good.
He sold two sawed-off shotguns to a man he met at that gathering, but that man turned out to be a federal informant. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms planned to use the illegal weapons sale to recruit Weaver as an informant, as well.
Forgetting for a moment the pure insanity of a weapon being illegal because it was 3/8ths of an inch too short of some adventitious rule, was there any proof that the weapon he sold was, in fact, too short or was it altered after purchase? I guess we'll never know will we?
Like I said before, no wonder you people are so gullible.
|
|
jonnyrig
climber
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 08:09am PT
|
Oh, gee... did I make a funny?
|
|
jonnyrig
climber
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 08:12am PT
|
I guess assumption is the mother of all....
Oh, f*#k you guys then. Time for me to go play in the snow on the freeway. L8r.
|
|
jonnyrig
climber
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 08:13am PT
|
What did I just do? I read some of y'all's posts. My bad.
|
|
franky
Trad climber
Black Hills, SD
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 08:39am PT
|
Willing seller means they in some way stated they were interested in selling their land, received an offer, and accepted it.
Based on your comments, I'll even let you find an example where the federal government directly interfered with the way a private owner ran their private land that caused them to want to sell. I bet you won't find that either.
|
|
Fritz
Trad climber
Choss Creek, ID
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 09:12am PT
|
Hey Jonnyrig! I think you write very well. After re-reading what DMT finds so humorous, I still can't understand what's so funny about it.
Keep writing dude!
I did find a simple essay on public lands this morning in the Idaho state Journal. http://www.pocatelloshops.com/new_blogs/politics/?p=15630#more-15630
The author sums it up with this statement.
Sixty-two percent of Idaho remains U.S. public land. Unlike back East, down South, or the Plains states, we don’t have to beg big landowners if we want to explore the land, to ride, fish, hunt, hike, camp or climb. A growing number of power brokers just hate that average folks still have this kind of freedom. Bundy and the Koch Brothers have their heads screwed on backwards and guns pointed in the wrong direction.
My 75 year old brother is a proud & fat Idaho redneck. However, during the Sagebrush Rebellion talk of the 1980's he quickly figured out that those who wanted the Feds to turn over OUR public lands to state control, intended to then have most of those lands pass into private hands. He realized his hunting, fishing, & 4-WD access would likely end. He fervently fought for OUR continued ownership of OUR public lands under the management of the BLM & Forest Service.
I am encouraged to see some hunting organizations like Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, a sportsmen’s group based in Joseph, Oregon protesting the CowQuida land grab. http://www.opb.org/news/series/burns-oregon-standoff-bundy-militia-news-updates/hunters-tear-down-militants-sign-at-malheur-refuge/
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 09:51am PT
|
we don’t have to beg big landowners if we want to explore the land, to ride, fish, hunt, hike, camp or climb.
Um....hmm.....ah, as it turns out, yes we do. It just happens to be a landowner you prefer.....today.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 10:02am PT
|
Hey Jonnyrig! I think you write very well. After re-reading what DMT finds so humorous, I still can't understand what's so funny about it.
He is accusing us all of GUILT, in the middle of a rant about assuming GUILT when one is convicted by a jury.
That is pretty funny, the the kettle calling the pot black.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 10:03am PT
|
Um....hmm.....ah, as it turns out, yes we do. It just happens to be a landowner you prefer.....today.
perhaps you could give an example. Otherwise, you appear to be simply a bag of hot air.
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 10:17am PT
|
You want me to give you examples of the government restricting access to "public" lands? Lol
|
|
franky
Trad climber
Black Hills, SD
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 10:19am PT
|
Private land owners in South Dakota will charge hundreds or even thousands of dollars a day to let people pheasant hunt on their land. Even those private land-owners who have registered with the state to become walk-ins (for which they are paid with government money) have restrictions that are many times more onerous than what the USFS, BLM, or even the state of South Dakota require.
For example, walk-ins universally don't allow any OHV use or camping and sometimes have rules restricting seasons or methods of take beyond state regulation. They don't even allow hunters to drive on their roads. They also don't allow any other land use outside of hunting. They are also usually grazed low enough that you couldn't hide an Easter egg in 100 acres.
State of South Dakota land is the most restrictive of government land by far, again not allowing any OHV use or camping.
Then there is the USFS, which allows OHV use off roads in the Black Hills National Forest and surrounding Grasslands, allows dispersed camping, doesn't require leashes on dogs, allows target shooting, etc.
I can't understand how any outdoorsman would prefer private land ownership to government ownership unless said outdoorsman is rich. Not just rich either, but you'd have to be filthy, stinking rich to have outdoor opportunities on private land that could truly compare to public.
|
|
kattz
climber
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 10:50am PT
|
I'm afraid that if a real Communist or other totalitarian government came to power, most of the US population would stay silent and not issue much of an objection, unfortunately, at this point in history. A lot of people wouldn't even realize they're in totalitarian state, as soon as bread and circuses are still there.
|
|
kattz
climber
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 11:07am PT
|
"Then there is the USFS, which allows OHV use off roads in the Black Hills National Forest and surrounding Grasslands, allows dispersed camping, doesn't require leashes on dogs, allows target shooting, etc.
I can't understand how any outdoorsman would prefer private land ownership to government ownership unless said outdoorsman is rich."
Exactly. Just look at SF Bay area atrocious land use situation... enough said. Eventually, as population increases, all land will become more crowded and valuable. USFS and BLM are the last pockets of freedom, unless you own a very large parcel yourself. They have to have SOME restrictions, to avoid the land being trashed and turning into a giant trailer park. The Malheur occupiers who're not rich ranchers are just Joe "why can't I shoot petards in the dry forest any time I'm drunk?"
|
|
Fritz
Trad climber
Choss Creek, ID
|
|
|
Jan 31, 2016 - 12:45pm PT
|
As the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge enters its 30th day, it appears the FBI may be locking down lines of communication.
OPB spoke with the remaining occupiers inside the refuge Sunday by cellphone. They say federal authorities have locked down their ability to make or receive calls.
David Fry, one of the four remaining militants, said the FBI made it so the occupiers can’t make outgoing calls on their cellphones. Fry said he can receive incoming calls, but that the other three in the refuge appear unable to receive calls on their cellphones. The militants also said they’ve lost access to the internet.
The militants said they aren’t currently inside any of the buildings at the refuge and they’ve been using a generator so they aren’t sure if the FBI also cut power to the buildings.
Sean Anderson, another of the remaining militants inside the refuge, expressed frustration with the FBI’s barricade that is preventing media from getting into the refuge.
Repeated calls to the refuge’s landline Sunday morning resulted in a busy signal.
http://www.opb.org/news/series/burns-oregon-standoff-bundy-militia-news-updates/fbi-blocking-lines-of-communication-militants-say/
Oh man, how cruel can those Feds be? No internet! No access to the Media?
More importantly, it reads like their supply of dildos & lubricant has likely been cut too, along with their requested French Vanilla creamer, fresh vegetables, cigarettes, & chew.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!