- Joined
- Jun 21, 2013
- Messages
- 16,763
- Reaction score
- 4,344
- Location
- Melbourne Florida
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
No freedoms were lost, he broke the law. Sad day that you side with lawbreakers. You have NO credibility when speaking of the law. You're dismissed.
Mans cattle was taken. That's how he makes a living. So, yea freedoms were impacted.No freedoms were lost, he broke the law. Sad day that you side with lawbreakers. You have NO credibility when speaking of the law. You're dismissed.
Possession harms the child. Sad you don't realize that, which makes my comments 100% CORRECT. Next time before making stupid comments why don't you talk to some victims of child molestation and ask them if possession that video of the crime harms them or not. They will say YES.
Moderator's Warning: |
Not other threads nor the discussion of possessing child porn. There should be no further responses to that topic here. |
Do you have a point?
You make it sound like the government in this country is anything y other than regular citizens and elected officials. It's not a separate class of individuals. Public workers don't make a dime off that federal land. They just do their job and follow the law dictated by Congress. If conservatives are so worried about grazing rights get your conservative house to pass something changing how it's done.
Sure, the government came armed with guns and when meet with people armed with guns we find them bitching like little children all scared and **** of those people.
No freedoms were lost, he broke the law. Sad day that you side with lawbreakers. You have NO credibility when speaking of the law. You're dismissed.
Regular citizens stop being regular citizens when they become elected officials. And some elected officials believe in an authoritarian and all powerful central government while many of the citizens of this country do not. Furthermore, having been elected doesn't negate the peoples rights to stand up in opposition to govt when it gets out of hand.
Sure, the government came armed with guns and when meet with people armed with guns we find them bitching like little children all scared and **** of those people.
Colorado is breaking the law....arrest it.
That unnamed person never said "I will shoot law enforcement". For all you know, he could have been saying "We won't hesitate to shoot the cattle" or "We won't hesitate to shoot Bundy".
If he/she committed a crime, he/she would have been arrested by now.
And I like how right wing loons only respect the laws they agree with. And if anybody tries to enforce a law they don't like, they are perfectly justified in killing them.
Did Mr. Bundy break the laws? Is the government enforcing laws you don't like justification for threatening the use of violence? At what point should citizens use violence or threaten the use of violence against their own government?
I'm not sure how enforcing laws on the books are "getting out of hand". The response the government has used is basically due to an armed "militia" showing up
If anyone in the Obama administration had ever committed any crime, they would have been arrested by now.
If anyone in the Obama administration had ever committed any crime, they would have been arrested by now.
The Federal government has a long history of prosecuting and ignoring state's marijuana laws. It wasn't too long ago that there were crackdowns in California marijuana dispensaries. Of course...unless unlike Bundy people are actually trying to start a movement to change federal marijuana laws.
Unless you'd like to restate this in comprehensible, I'm going to answer on the assumption that you were trying to make a point. It would appear that bundy feels the grazing fees are wrong despite being legal and is creating a movement to change them.
There are plenty of laws that were deemed unacceptable to the people and have been changed or just rescinded all together. The process of doing that has often started somewhat violently. Prohibition and slavery are great examples.
Unless you'd like to restate this in comprehensible, I'm going to answer on the assumption that you were trying to make a point. It would appear that bundy feels the grazing fees are wrong despite being legal and is creating a movement to change them.
There are plenty of laws that were deemed unacceptable to the people and have been changed or just rescinded all together. The process of doing that has often started somewhat violently. Prohibition and slavery are great examples.
You really wanna put grazing fees on the same level as slavery?
No, the armed militia was in response to the heavy handed tactics of the BLM. Furthermore, the armed militia had every right to be armed. The militia was completely within their rights...which is why the BLM backed down.
Do you think the police should be able to do anything they want to apprehend suspects?
I thought you gun passionists were all about concealed carry--except MLK in your subliminal use of race of course.But he would have been armed if he could have, MLK, Mr. Non-Violence, applied for a concealed weapon permit.
And how many of these armed militia burned-out cowards do you think had state and federal warrants out for them?No, the armed militia was in response to the heavy handed tactics of the BLM.
Mans cattle was taken. That's how he makes a living. So, yea freedoms were impacted.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?