#1
So apparently the whole Bundy ranch thing actually ended with the feds pissing themselves running after they threatened to shoot the crowd and the crowd challenged it. I guess its not so fun when someone might actually end you, and you can't just flashbang into a room unannounced and dump a mag into their bed while they sleep.

What's even funnier is google is trying to censor it. If you try to share it on Facebook or Google+, it marks the link as "unsafe", and doesn't let you post or send it. So here's a link to the vid, and a third party link above it in case you feel like sharing it on either of the two.

Also, inb4 its shit because infowars. Sorry, but I can't find the footage anywhere else and at least you don't have to hear Jones rant about chameleon-like space Jews or something.

http://www.prepperideas.com/why-the-blm-left-the-bundy-ranch/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_XqdQjTflc
I'm always screwing with my rig. Muh chilluns:
Warmoth NRFR strat JB/Jazz
Mesa Boogie Royal Atlantic, Diezel 2x12
Turbo tuner, J Cantrell wah, Alesis 3630
Green Rhino, Wampler Velvet, Strymon ElCap/Lex, Phase 45
#3


I'm always screwing with my rig. Muh chilluns:
Warmoth NRFR strat JB/Jazz
Mesa Boogie Royal Atlantic, Diezel 2x12
Turbo tuner, J Cantrell wah, Alesis 3630
Green Rhino, Wampler Velvet, Strymon ElCap/Lex, Phase 45
#4
Ok, 1:00 in and I'm fed up of the video already - just looks/sounds like a bunch of hillbillies marching about something that hasn't been mentioned yet.

I don't know what the whole 'Bundy Ranch' thing is, I'm sure I probably wouldn't care if I did, but does anybody want to condense the relevant information into a single post so I can decide whether this thread is random spam or actually worth not closing?
Hey, look. Sigs are back.
#5
I just read up about it. Apparently these Bundy's have used federal owned land to graze their cattle for hundreds of years and now the government want to take it away from them after allowing it for all this time. This is a landmark moment for the western world. It will show people all we have to do is stand up against them together and we can stop the government from taking away our rights. I'm not surprised mainstream media is ignoring it, as it does regarding anything vaguely anti government.
you cant spell manslaughter without laughter


Quote by ACG
I like my women how I like my cookies. Smothered in diarrhea.
#6
Quote by DisarmGoliath
Ok, 1:00 in and I'm fed up of the video already - just looks/sounds like a bunch of hillbillies marching about something that hasn't been mentioned yet.

I don't know what the whole 'Bundy Ranch' thing is, I'm sure I probably wouldn't care if I did, but does anybody want to condense the relevant information into a single post so I can decide whether this thread is random spam or actually worth not closing?


Its pretty massive for Americans. Pretty much, government saying it can do what it wants because its the government and screw any and all rights the people have.

This video breaks it down greatly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=tAwALTdrMZ8&app=desktop
I'm always screwing with my rig. Muh chilluns:
Warmoth NRFR strat JB/Jazz
Mesa Boogie Royal Atlantic, Diezel 2x12
Turbo tuner, J Cantrell wah, Alesis 3630
Green Rhino, Wampler Velvet, Strymon ElCap/Lex, Phase 45
#7
Assuming that's correct - surely if it's government-owned (or federal-owned, whatever) land, there isn't really any right for the people to raise cattle there? They've just been allowed to, until now?

I mean, if you don't own the land and (presumably) there's a reason that the owners don't want you on it, what right do you have to stay there? This is the same as the whole 'travellers being forced to move off land' problems we have in the UK, with the difference being that instead of these people being travellers (or gypsies, if you will, though I understand that isn't a term they like), the people involved are farmers as such.
Hey, look. Sigs are back.
#8
Disarm, what if your landlord didn't grant you a parking pass, but let you park in the lot anyway. Say that did that for like the last 5 years. All of a sudden, you wake up to the sounds of your car being towed, and now you can't get to work and school. It's all 'legal' because you didn't have a parking pass.

What would your reaction be?
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
Last edited by JustRooster at Apr 14, 2014,
#9
Quote by JustRooster
Disarm, what if your landlord didn't grant you a parking pass, but let you park in the lot anyway. Say that did that for like the last 5 years. All of a sudden, you wake up to the sounds of your car being towed, and now you can't get to work and school. It's all 'legal' because you didn't have a parking pass.

What would your reaction be?




Seeing as how the property belongs to the landlord/government, I think they can decide how to use it.

The land doesn't belong to Bundy, so I really don't think he has a right to piss and moan about this at all. If my neighbor used my swimming pool for several years, and I suddenly decided I didn't want them to use it any more, I expect them to listen to me. It isn't their property, and they have no right to use it without permission.


Obviously it's not an ideal situation for Bundy, but life is tough.


Hell, I'm going to start using my neighbors bathroom every time I need to shit. It might be his property, but I don't have to listen to him when he tells me not to use it.
#10
Quote by DisarmGoliath
Assuming that's correct - surely if it's government-owned (or federal-owned, whatever) land, there isn't really any right for the people to raise cattle there? They've just been allowed to, until now?

I mean, if you don't own the land and (presumably) there's a reason that the owners don't want you on it, what right do you have to stay there? This is the same as the whole 'travellers being forced to move off land' problems we have in the UK, with the difference being that instead of these people being travellers (or gypsies, if you will, though I understand that isn't a term they like), the people involved are farmers as such.


The point is outlined in the video I just posted. A vague explanation would be, there is a taxman that comes by to pick up the tax to graze cattle, which Bundy has been paying for. Then the BLM comes by and says he's not paying them money and he needs to because they say so, and they rewrite the rules and give him the finger despite the previous agreements with the government.

The reason the BLM states he needs to pay them money is because of "endangered tortoises" which are ironically being euthanized by the BLM. In reality, a senator wants the land for his Chinese company to move in and plant some solar tech or some other garbage to make him money. He's strong arming Bundy with the Bureaucracy and fed agents to make money. Normally, this would be considered corruption, because he's using the government for his own personal gain, but nobody will bring it up because they all do it.
I'm always screwing with my rig. Muh chilluns:
Warmoth NRFR strat JB/Jazz
Mesa Boogie Royal Atlantic, Diezel 2x12
Turbo tuner, J Cantrell wah, Alesis 3630
Green Rhino, Wampler Velvet, Strymon ElCap/Lex, Phase 45
#11
Quote by daytripper75
Seeing as how the property belongs to the landlord/government, I think they can decide how to use it.

The land doesn't belong to Bundy, so I really don't think he has a right to piss and moan about this at all. If my neighbor used my swimming pool for several years, and I suddenly decided I didn't want them to use it any more, I expect them to listen to me. It isn't their property, and they have no right to use it without permission.


Obviously it's not an ideal situation for Bundy, but life is tough.


That doesn't answer my question.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#12
Quote by JustRooster
Disarm, what if your landlord didn't grant you a parking pass, but let you park in the lot anyway. Say that did that for like the last 5 years. All of a sudden, you wake up to the sounds of your car being towed, and now you can't get to work and school. It's all 'legal' because you didn't have a parking pass.

What would your reaction be?

That's different - a) I pay for the property, which includes the parking space unless otherwise specified (which it isn't) and b) that presumes a pass is either not granted, or not available, until it suddenly exists.

I see what you're trying to say, but it's not the same thing, and in the example you gave it would be easily argued (and won) in court that the tenant was not given the ability to have such a permit, which should be specified in some way in the rent agreement (and unless it said specifically that you can't park there, you have no problem).
Hey, look. Sigs are back.
#13
And yeah, if a landlord decides they want you out, for example, there is usually an agreed notice period (typically one month, with flat tenancies over here) when signing the tenancy agreement, and that's all that is required. If they no longer want to rent a property to you, you can't argue that they have to - onus is on you to find somewhere else to live in that grace period.
Hey, look. Sigs are back.
#15
Quote by DisarmGoliath
That's different - a) I pay for the property, which includes the parking space unless otherwise specified (which it isn't) and b) that presumes a pass is either not granted, or not available, until it suddenly exists.

I see what you're trying to say, but it's not the same thing, and in the example you gave it would be easily argued (and won) in court that the tenant was not given the ability to have such a permit, which should be specified in some way in the rent agreement (and unless it said specifically that you can't park there, you have no problem).


The point is, it isn't different. It basically is the situation that was described.

And the next point is, its as if you took your landlord to court, and he was the judge.
I'm always screwing with my rig. Muh chilluns:
Warmoth NRFR strat JB/Jazz
Mesa Boogie Royal Atlantic, Diezel 2x12
Turbo tuner, J Cantrell wah, Alesis 3630
Green Rhino, Wampler Velvet, Strymon ElCap/Lex, Phase 45
#16
Quote by JustRooster
That doesn't answer my question.



I'd be pissed off, but what can I do? It's not my property. Unless there was a specific contract that I signed with the landlord, he can change the policy whenever he sees fit.


I guarantee I'd go to jail if I confronted him with a gun, and threatened him for changing his policy.
#17
Quote by DisarmGoliath
That's different - a) I pay for the property, which includes the parking space unless otherwise specified (which it isn't) and b) that presumes a pass is either not granted, or not available, until it suddenly exists.

I see what you're trying to say, but it's not the same thing, and in the example you gave it would be easily argued (and won) in court that the tenant was not given the ability to have such a permit, which should be specified in some way in the rent agreement (and unless it said specifically that you can't park there, you have no problem).



He paid taxes for use of that specific land, actually. There was an article somewhere where he posted shots from his bank history showing where he did. That, and he just pays taxes in general.

And I totally did specify that you don't get a parking spot. I told you that you don't get a parking pass. You totally just change the parameters of my question to fit your answer.

It completely is the same thing, though. It's far more the same thing than the UK land disputes, which are hardly analogous. I'm not a "MUH CONSTITUTION" kind of dude, but this is a pretty cut and dry case of someone at the federal level trying to give this guy a finger and ruin his way of life that was established by his family more than 5 generations ago.


Quote by DisarmGoliath
And yeah, if a landlord decides they want you out, for example, there is usually an agreed notice period (typically one month, with flat tenancies over here) when signing the tenancy agreement, and that's all that is required. If they no longer want to rent a property to you, you can't argue that they have to - onus is on you to find somewhere else to live in that grace period.


Again, adding parameters to a hypothetical scenario to fit the answer you wanted to give.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#18
Quote by Guy_Mitchell
The point is, it isn't different. It basically is the situation that was described.

And the next point is, its as if you took your landlord to court, and he was the judge.

No, it really isn't the same… at all.

Case A: Landlord owns land, tenant is not paying the rent/doesn't own the land, and has no contract stating they can be there. Landlord decides they no longer want the tenant there, so they attempt to have them removed when the tenant does not comply.

Case B: Landlord owns land, tenant is paying rent to live on this land, and has a legally-binding contract expressing their right to remain on this land for length of contract. Landlord wants you gone? They give you written warning, and you are legally obliged to move by end of the grace period stated on the original contract.
Hey, look. Sigs are back.
#19
Quote by DisarmGoliath
No, it really isn't the same… at all.

Case A: Landlord owns land, tenant is not paying the rent/doesn't own the land, and has no contract stating they can be there. Landlord decides they no longer want the tenant there, so they attempt to have them removed when the tenant does not comply.

Case B: Landlord owns land, tenant is paying rent to live on this land, and has a legally-binding contract expressing their right to remain on this land for length of contract. Landlord wants you gone? They give you written warning, and you are legally obliged to move by end of the grace period stated on the original contract.



HE IS PAYING FOR THE LAND. He had payed a specific extra tax to use it for his entire life.


Quote by DisarmGoliath

Case B: Landlord owns land, tenant is paying rent to live on this land, and has a legally-binding contract expressing their right to remain on this land for length of contract. Landlord wants you gone? They give you written warning, and you are legally obliged to move by end of the grace period stated on the original contract.


I was only talking about your parking pass, dude.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#20
Quote by daytripper75
I'd be pissed off, but what can I do? It's not my property. Unless there was a specific contract that I signed with the landlord, he can change the policy whenever he sees fit.


I guarantee I'd go to jail if I confronted him with a gun, and threatened him for changing his policy.


Again, the agreement with Bundy was already made and in a finalized agreement with the fed, a contract. The BLM popped out of nowhere and said they could change it out of the blue. Bundy challenged it in court.

Another problem is, the BLM was the defendant... and judge, jury, and executioner.
I'm always screwing with my rig. Muh chilluns:
Warmoth NRFR strat JB/Jazz
Mesa Boogie Royal Atlantic, Diezel 2x12
Turbo tuner, J Cantrell wah, Alesis 3630
Green Rhino, Wampler Velvet, Strymon ElCap/Lex, Phase 45
#21
Quote by JustRooster
He paid taxes for use of that specific land, actually. There was an article somewhere where he posted shots from his bank history showing where he did. That, and he just pays taxes in general.

Paying taxes is not the same as paying rent or owning the land. It's not even the same department of government responsible for taxes as with land ownership.

And I totally did specify that you don't get a parking spot. I told you that you don't get a parking pass. You totally just change the parameters of my question to fit your answer.

No, I pointed out what would be the case with any legal contract relating to your hypothetical situation. If there is a designated space for a property, it will have to state in the contract if you are not allowed to park there. If it doesn't state otherwise, and that space is clearly marked as for the property (e.g. the property number painted on the space) then you would clearly win any court case relating to it.

It completely is the same thing, though. It's far more the same thing than the UK land disputes, which are hardly analogous. I'm not a "MUH CONSTITUTION" kind of dude, but this is a pretty cut and dry case of someone at the federal level trying to give this guy a finger and ruin his way of life that was established by his family more than 5 generations ago.

How is it any different? In neither case do the people on the land own that land, or pay rent to be on that land. It's far more analogous than the case of a private tenancy agreement and its relation to a parking space, which are entirely different situations (and a private rent arrangement; not the use of a government-owned space).

Again, adding parameters to a hypothetical scenario to fit the answer you wanted to give.
I was trying to explain it in a way you might actually understand as different.
Hey, look. Sigs are back.
#22
Quote by JustRooster
HE IS PAYING FOR THE LAND. He had payed a specific extra tax to use it for his entire life.

Again, tax is not rent or planning permission or any other possible thing other than tax.

I was only talking about your parking pass, dude.

Yeah, that was answering the TS - not you.
Hey, look. Sigs are back.
#23
Quote by DisarmGoliath
Paying taxes is not the same as paying rent or owning the land. It's not even the same department of government responsible for taxes as with land ownership.





Again, for like my 3rd post, and what the other guy mentioned twice, he did have a paid agreement with the custodian of that land for use of that land.


Quote by DisarmGoliath


I don't know what the whole 'Bundy Ranch' thing is...


You've got some strong opinions regardless.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
Last edited by JustRooster at Apr 14, 2014,
#24
Quote by JustRooster
Again, for like my 3rd post, and what the other guy mentioned twice, he did have a payed agreement with the custodian of that land for use of that land.

Then why do you keep referring to paying tax? If he is/was paying rent, why didn't you specifically say that? Lol.

You've got some strong opinions regardless.

I have an opinion, based purely on what was mentioned in the thread - I clearly asked for somebody to explain it as clearly as they could, and then formed an opinion based on that explanation. If that initial explanation was inaccurate or omitted important details, I don't see how that is my fault.
Hey, look. Sigs are back.
#25
Because the government took that payment in form of a tax.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#26
Quote by DisarmGoliath
Again, tax is not rent or planning permission or any other possible thing other than tax.


He pays a grazing tax to graze the cattle, I don't know how they do things in the UK, but that is what is agreed in the contract as "payment" or "rent".

He grazes on federal land if he pays an extra tax, which he has been paying. Now, another entity has come in and said he has to pay another tax, illegally breaking the previous agreement which was not subject to change.
I'm always screwing with my rig. Muh chilluns:
Warmoth NRFR strat JB/Jazz
Mesa Boogie Royal Atlantic, Diezel 2x12
Turbo tuner, J Cantrell wah, Alesis 3630
Green Rhino, Wampler Velvet, Strymon ElCap/Lex, Phase 45
#27
But a tax is not a rent/tenancy agreement. If you're saying he had a written agreement, and he paid a stated amount to abide by that agreement, then it isn't really a tax…

Well, regardless of all that trivial definition of tax etc. - unless this agreement specified otherwise, I understand he'd be annoyed but if he doesn't own the land I don't see how he has a right to remain there if they decide to end the agreement.
Hey, look. Sigs are back.
#28
Quote by Guy_Mitchell
The point is outlined in the video I just posted. A vague explanation would be, there is a taxman that comes by to pick up the tax to graze cattle, which Bundy has been paying for. Then the BLM comes by and says he's not paying them money and he needs to because they say so, and they rewrite the rules and give him the finger despite the previous agreements with the government.

The reason the BLM states he needs to pay them money is because of "endangered tortoises" which are ironically being euthanized by the BLM. In reality, a senator wants the land for his Chinese company to move in and plant some solar tech or some other garbage to make him money. He's strong arming Bundy with the Bureaucracy and fed aagents to make money. Normally, this would be considered corruption, because he's using the government for his own personal gain, but nobody will bring it up because they all do it.



Quote by Guy_Mitchell
Again, the agreement with Bundy was already made and in a finalized agreement with the fed, a contract. The BLM popped out of nowhere and said they could change it out of the blue. Bundy challenged it in court.

Another problem is, the BLM was the defendant... and judge, jury, and executioner.



Mitchell explained it really well. If that's the conclusion you're getting from this situation, then I'll just go ahead and assume we're not going to agree for personal reasons more than logical ones. Have a good day.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#30
Quote by Cavalcade
Don't feed the troll, Disarm.

I'm always screwing with my rig. Muh chilluns:
Warmoth NRFR strat JB/Jazz
Mesa Boogie Royal Atlantic, Diezel 2x12
Turbo tuner, J Cantrell wah, Alesis 3630
Green Rhino, Wampler Velvet, Strymon ElCap/Lex, Phase 45
#31
"I have no contract with the United States government," Bundy said. "I was paying grazing fees for management and that's what BLM was supposed to be, land managers and they were managing my ranch out of business, so I refused to pay."


http://abcnews.go.com/US/nevada-cattle-rancher-wins-range-war-federal-government/story?id=23302610


So, Bundy said right there that he had no contract with them. In that case, how is the BLM doing anything wrong? If the land doesn't belong to Bundy, and he has no contract with the government, what is he trying to argue?


It sounds like he was paying to graze, decided he didn't want to pay anymore, and stopped.
Last edited by DisarmGoliath at Apr 14, 2014,
#32
This is interesting to watch, and by this I mean the whole situation moreso than this thread...
Is it gonna heat up? Fester into something more serious than a land grazing dispute? (horrid land to graze cattle by the looks of it, but anyway...)
Or just fizzle away into nothing?? I hope so, I have loved ones round there that I'd hate for them to get caught in the crossfire.
Quote by sickman411
S-Gsus wept
#33
Quote by daytripper75
http://abcnews.go.com/US/nevada-cattle-rancher-wins-range-war-federal-government/story?id=23302610


So, Bundy said right there that he had no contract with them. In that case, how is the BLM doing anything wrong? If the land doesn't belong to Bundy, and he has no contract with the government, what is he trying to argue?


It sounds like he was paying to graze, decided he didn't want to pay anymore, and stopped.

Well, isn't that interesting
Hey, look. Sigs are back.
#34
Quote by daytripper75
http://abcnews.go.com/US/nevada-cattle-rancher-wins-range-war-federal-government/story?id=23302610


So, Bundy said right there that he had no contract with them. In that case, how is the BLM doing anything wrong? If the land doesn't belong to Bundy, and he has no contract with the government, what is he trying to argue?


It sounds like he was paying to graze, decided he didn't want to pay anymore, and stopped.


The jumpcut is unnerving. But anyway.

In that case, we have using federal land for a senator's personal gain. Possibly attacking protesters although I can't find anything that confirms or denies. Sicking a dog on a pregnant woman. And it is still a bureaucratic entity with more power than it should have, presiding as judge over its own case that it plays role as defendant.

And the whole "first amendment area" thing. That's pretty ****ed up on its own.

OFFTOPIC: In other news, my Mark V has stopped working and the worst part is, the fuse isn't blown and the tubes are fine. I can already tell today is going to be a box of sunshine blown up my ass.
I'm always screwing with my rig. Muh chilluns:
Warmoth NRFR strat JB/Jazz
Mesa Boogie Royal Atlantic, Diezel 2x12
Turbo tuner, J Cantrell wah, Alesis 3630
Green Rhino, Wampler Velvet, Strymon ElCap/Lex, Phase 45
Last edited by Guy_Mitchell at Apr 14, 2014,