The end of the Oregon standoff

posted at 8:01 am on January 27, 2016 by Jazz Shaw

Call it a standoff or a showdown, a protest, an occupation or whatever you like, but after nearly a month the confrontation between the Bundy brothers and federal officials seems to be close to an end. After federal agents moved in on the Oregon compound last night, one protester was dead and several are under arrest, including the Bundys. NBC News was one of the first with the story.

Ammon and Ryan Bundy, the brothers leading anti-government protesters occupying Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon, and five other people were arrested Tuesday, state and federal authorities said. One person was dead, the FBI said.

Shots were fired about 4:25 p.m. (7:25 p.m. ET) when the FBI and Oregon State Police began an “enforcement action,” the FBI said. It didn’t identify the victim but said he or she wasn’t a law enforcement officer.

Three other people were in custody in addition to the Bundys in the initial incident, authorities said:

Brian Cavalier, 44, of Bunkerville, Nevada
Shawna Cox, 59, Kanab, Utah
Ryan Waylen Payne, 32, of Anaconda, Montana

You can find a more complete timeline of the events over at Yahoo News. We also get what should serve as suitable confirmation of the identity of the protester who was killed.

Authorities did not identify the person killed, saying only that it was an adult male who died in an “officer involved shooting” during law officers’ confrontation with Ammon Bundy and his followers during a traffic stop outside Burns, Oregon.

However Arianna Finicum Brown told ( http://bit.ly/1nOammV ) the Portland, Oregon, newspaper that the man killed was her father – 55-year-old Robert “LaVoy” Finicum of Cane Beds, Arizona. LaVoy Finicum was a frequent and public presence at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, often speaking for the group at news conferences.

During previous briefings with the press Finicum had made various comments along the lines of saying that he preferred death to jail, as well as stressing the importance of freedom. I imagine it’s going to be a while before we get all the details of how the shooting started, but if Finicum drew first there likely won’t be much fallout from it. Given the current state of technology I would be extremely surprised if there isn’t some video of the shooting out there somewhere. The feds might have had dash cams or body cams, the media has had cameras pointed at the refuge from day one and I’m sure most of the protesters had cell phones on them. So if it turns out that the feds shot first, unleashing all sorts of comparisons to Ruby Ridge, we’ll find out sooner or later.

In the end, I suppose that this situation had to come to come a crescendo in fairly short order and it probably couldn’t have ended any other way. Bundy’s crew clearly was prepared to settle in for the long haul and the federal government couldn’t simply allow a group of armed individuals to take over a piece of government property uncontested. Most of the protesters clearly wanted to make a statement and draw attention to the issues under discussion, but they weren’t looking for an actual war.

Assuming everyone else is removed and/or arrested from the wildlife refuge, we’ll be down to the what have we learned stage of this play. Bundy and his followers have drawn attention to the massive amount of land controlled by the federal government and some of the more absurd rules they enforce in wilderness areas. They’ve also garnered national attention for a sustained period and likely started a long overdue conversation about the entire federal vs state balancing act in our nation’s government. But there will doubtless be trials to come and people heading to prison because, again, Uncle Sam can’t afford the sort of black eye that would result in simply letting them get away with it.

In other words, the main tent may be coming down, but this circus is really just getting started.

ammonbundy


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

The article I read this morning said that Finicum was shot three times in the chest. And the only shots fired were fired by law enforcement.

Solaratov on January 27, 2016 at 2:47 PM

Do you have a link to that? It’s the only indication I’ve seen by anybody regarding who fired the shots.

If this guy charged the officers there’s not going to be a lot of sympathy for him. But it’s going to be harder to sell the notion of some kind of massive shootout if all the shots were fired on one side, or for that matter, if the deceased were brandishing weapons of any kind at the time.

People have had all kind of ways to describe the Michael Brown scenario, but not many people referred to it as a “shootout with police”.

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 2:55 PM

But they didn’t arm themselves and implicitly threaten the lives of LEOs who might be called upon to do their jobs.

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 2:43 PM

Maybe the Feds should bring Janet “the flamethrower” Reno out of retirement for these serious crimes against the State.

antipc on January 27, 2016 at 2:58 PM

Solaratov on January 27, 2016 at 1:07 PM

In CA, he would receive a tax bill from the county assessor for a “Possessory Interest Tax” upon that land. It is the same tax you pay if you rent/lease a slip from a government owned marina for your boat. You “possess” the property, but have no ability to sell it, or even IMC to sub-lease it, but as far as the tax collector is concerned, it is yours and you have to pay an annual property tax on it.

Another Drew on January 27, 2016 at 2:59 PM

the federal government couldn’t simply allow a group of armed individuals to take over a piece of government property uncontested

Only the fed thugs are allowed to do that under threat of force.

SirGawain on January 27, 2016 at 3:06 PM

And Tlaloc is trying to shoehorn any and all protests that Conservatives make as “fascist rebellious scum who should be shot on sight.”

Then again, he himself admits that he thinks men who sacrifice their own lives to save their comrades do nothing of honor or respect, while those who rape and pee on cop cars are high heroes.

Vanceone on January 27, 2016 at 2:42 PM

Who is this other ‘Tlaloc’ who said all these things?

Tlaloc on January 27, 2016 at 3:07 PM

Who is this other ‘Tlaloc’ who said all these things?

Tlaloc on January 27, 2016 at 3:07 PM

It’s probably the same people.

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 3:10 PM

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 2:55 PM

More like the motorcycle scene in Waco last year, where it appears that all the shots were fired by the police.

Another Drew on January 27, 2016 at 3:11 PM

It’s probably the same people.

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 3:10 PM

That was actually kind of funny in a meta way.

Tlaloc on January 27, 2016 at 3:14 PM

an occupation or whatever you like

So LE is handling this the way they did the Occupy Wall Street movement then? OK, I’m glad no one was shot or killed in this occupation, either.

/s

Dr. ZhivBlago on January 27, 2016 at 3:25 PM

That was actually kind of funny in a meta way.

Tlaloc on January 27, 2016 at 3:14 PM

Well, somebody who regularly smears whole groups of people and attacks people’s character for things they didn’t say would probably find that funnier than most.

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 3:32 PM

Tlaloc: easy. You have said that Medal of Honor winners, even those who jump on grenades and save their fellow soldiers, do nothing worthy of respect or honor and in fact do more harm than good. And you’ve praised Occupy Wall Street, which was well known for raping women in their rape tents as well as peeing and pooping on police cars. Plus you’ve outright endorsed rioting with Ferguson and baltimore being justified and a great response to police thuggery.

But these guys in Oregon? I do believe you’ve said they should be shot on sight, as armed rebels or something similar.

Vanceone on January 27, 2016 at 3:43 PM

Only link I saw was on InfoWars, so I won’t be linking to that and will wait for another source.

LoganSix on January 27, 2016 at 8:45 AM

Oooh scary people telling the truth. Better not link to real reporting.

SirGawain on January 27, 2016 at 3:47 PM

Schaef….

I have been to every site I went to before I came to HA today, and I cannot find that article. It might have been taken down; or I might have missed it in my search. I’ll keep looking.

And, The Daily Mail says there was a “shootout” but no one knows who fired first. The guy on everdiso’s video says there was no “shootout”; and that Finicum was shot because he “charged” the cops. No one else…anywhere…says anything about Finicum “charging” them; nor do any articles. The Bundy’s and friends maintain that Finicum had his hands in the air at the time he was shot – and they were all seperated when taken to the fed lockup (so how could they collude on the story?).

Solaratov on January 27, 2016 at 3:55 PM

Well, you did previously consider me so dishonest that I wasn’t even worth talking to, even as I raised perfectly reasonable questions while the people around us came up with all manner of creative names for you, accused you of lying, etc.

If you want to get mad at me for a fight you started, that’s your prerogative. Or you can go back to considering me the worst of the bunch and take your chances with these other guys. Or you can just have a reasonable conversation; that was never off the table.

– The Schaef

You mean what you deem to be reasonable conversations.
I’m not mad and I’m not in any ‘fight’ with you – you’re the one who opts for a certain tone.
I know I was picking up the proverbial snake in the grass here by re-enaging.
But I figured, aww,what the heck.
Just try not to drip too much contempt on me?
I never get offended…just sometimes exhausted.

On we go…

Okay, so how many violent crimes were committed during the Oregon occupation?

I don’t have a count. Do you?
Regardless, what is Occupy comparable with Oregon?
My bad for allowing it was and responding in kind.
But the Occupy retorts just seem to be pure deflection.
I’m still curious to find out just what really happened yesterday.

I’m just trying to get an idea of how feces-filled cesspools where people were raped and murdered (by unarmed people, according to you, which makes the stabbings and shootings somewhat magical) are harmless, and these guys’ occupation resulted in harm to anyone other than their own members who were shot by cops, thus making them violent and dangerous.

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 2:51 PM

Well that’s some hardcore editorializing.
My issue with Occupy isn’t based on some hysterical and hyperbolic portrayal of ‘feces-filled cesspools where people were raped and murdered’.

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 3:57 PM

You mean what you deem to be reasonable conversations.

I mean reasonable conversations.

One of us predicated discussion of any kind on the answering of questions that he specifically admitted were not asked honestly, and said his reasons for doing so were selfish. I was not that one.

I don’t have a count. Do you?

Zero, unless you have evidence to the contrary.

But the Occupy retorts just seem to be pure deflection.

I wasn’t the one who introduced them into the conversation. I am simply responding to comparisons drawn by you.

My issue with Occupy isn’t based on some hysterical and hyperbolic portrayal of ‘feces-filled cesspools where people were raped and murdered’.

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 3:57 PM

Hysterical?

Hyperbolic?

There were no giant piles of dung?

There were no rapes?

There were no murders?

By all means, establish that the number of all of these was zero, in order to demonstrate that I am inventing this argument for the sake of hyperbole. I just thought rape and murder were on the table when violent crime was the subject.

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 4:03 PM

I’m just trying to get an idea of how feces-filled cesspools where people were raped and murdered (by unarmed people, according to you, which makes the stabbings and shootings somewhat magical) are harmless, and these guys’ occupation resulted in harm to anyone other than their own members who were shot by cops, thus making them violent and dangerous.

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 2:51 PM

Curious if you had a chance to actually see any of the Occupy sites in person?
Though I can understand if your perception of what you’d find kept you plenty distant.

I’m sure Oregon was comfy and friendly enough.
But I’ll admit I wouldn’t have put myself in-between armed anti-government activists and LEOs.
So a reasonable choice would be to stay far away.
Easy for me, sad for the locals and Oregonians and those who might want to visit the refuge.

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 4:08 PM

By all means, establish that the number of all of these was zero, in order to demonstrate that I am inventing this argument for the sake of hyperbole. I just thought rape and murder were on the table when violent crime was the subject.

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 4:03 PM

It is not needed to ‘establish that the number of all of these was zero’ in order to refute your portrayal.
The vast vast vast majority of those involved were not raping or murdering anyone.
But as I asked above…why the need to throw out all this ‘oh yea, what about all that Occupy stuff!’ in response to Bundy and his armed infiltrators?

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 4:12 PM

But the Occupy retorts just seem to be pure deflection.

I wasn’t the one who introduced them into the conversation.
– The Schaef

Wasn’t me either.

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 4:16 PM

But the Occupy retorts just seem to be pure deflection.
I wasn’t the one who introduced them into the conversation.
– The Schaef

Wasn’t me either.

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 4:16 PM

Just for the record…I looked back.
LashRambo introduced it –
followed by TommyBoy throwing it to me.

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 4:20 PM

But the Occupy retorts just seem to be pure deflection.
I wasn’t the one who introduced them into the conversation.
– The Schaef

Wasn’t me either.

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 4:16 PM

Just for the record…I looked back.
LashRambo introduced it –
followed by TommyBoy throwing it to me.

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 4:20 PM

And then you did indeed bring it up when addressing me.
So for our conversation – our reasonable one – you actually were the one who bought up Occupy.
No harm, no foul…just clarity on a minor point.
I feel a very slight vindication.
:)

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 4:25 PM

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/conflicting-accounts-lavoy-finicum-death

Conflicting reports of what led to shooting.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 4:40 PM

See the Grand Canyon village area right on the south rim for how that works.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 1:02 PM

OK. SO you don’t like El Tovar and think all the lodges should be taken down?

And you seem to think private +/or state ownership would be fiscally unsound?

WryTrvllr on January 27, 2016 at 4:42 PM

WryTrvllr

You and I have talked about just this point. I love el Tovar. And if I recall, so do you. I’m simply using the village and the resulting restrictions on camping access, etc. that happens with even partial privatization as example. The surrounding BLM land has unfettered and free camping access (with that $20 per vehicle park entrance fee)—but even if you stay in one of the lesser expensive lodges, if you want to overnight on the rim you’ll pay a pretty penny because of the privatization.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 4:49 PM

WryTrvllr

It’s not unsound, it just costs more.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 4:51 PM

Curious if you had a chance to actually see any of the Occupy sites in person?
Though I can understand if your perception of what you’d find kept you plenty distant.

I did. I visited both the Oakland and SF Occupy camps. Nasty, smelly, garbagey — like a post-apoc squatters camp. The one in SF had signs up “DON’T PEE HERE PLEASE!” in common areas, other places had signs like “NOT A TOILET!”…but often smelling of human waste. These “Occupiers” not only occupied a public place they also caused immense property damage to parks and local businesses, staged marches to shut down traffic and even blocked the gates to the Port of Oakland so no trucking traffic could go in or out. Now, that’s a facility “protected” by DHS and under the regulatory control of the Federal Government and was a MUCH more serious disruption than occupying an empty building in the backwoods in winter…yet there was no confrontation, nobody got shot, nobody even tried to get the protesters to move!! Just let them do there thing, stop all action at the Port for at least a day and create nasty logistics backlog…with no penalty.

So why did these guys get the full court press? Why not just let them squat in an empty building in winter — blockade it so no food/water in or out, shut off power, gas and water…they’d leave by themselves after a week when they ran out of food and got too uncomfortable.

EasyEight on January 27, 2016 at 4:51 PM

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 4:49 PM

Yeah, I seem to remember not being able to visit Jewel Caves, get into Yosemite Valley, or visit the Queen’s Chamber anymore.

None of those are private.

If you are going to limit access, why not do it by generating revenue?

Oh. I said it.

WryTrvllr on January 27, 2016 at 4:52 PM

Getting a ticket to stay at Phantom creek was pretty tough too. Why so restrictive?

WryTrvllr on January 27, 2016 at 4:54 PM

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/oregon-occupiers-call-to-arms

Call to arms.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 4:54 PM

Getting a ticket to stay at Phantom creek was pretty tough too. Why so restrictive?
WryTrvllr on January 27, 2016 at 4:54 PM

For the same reasons getting a pass to raft through the canyon on the Colorado is controlled—population and environmental concerns.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 4:57 PM

* population congestion

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 4:58 PM

For the same reasons getting a pass to raft through the canyon on the Colorado is controlled—population and environmental concerns.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 4:57 PM

So you don’t let people do these things to preserve their “pristine” state, and condemn it when the concessionaires achieve the same goal making thrice the money.

Look, I understand you think it’s more fair for money to not make difference, and to some extent I agree.

But don’t condemn private enterprise for doing exactly what you want .gov to do. Make it exclusive, and expensive.

WryTrvllr on January 27, 2016 at 5:00 PM

Oh, and unless I am mistaken, all those river trips are owned by connected people. Like Hatch.

WryTrvllr on January 27, 2016 at 5:02 PM

WryTrvllr

Private enterprise makes it more expensive and exclusive, by comparison.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 5:05 PM

WryTrvllr

If you use their service, yes. But you can put in on your own, if you secured the permit.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 5:06 PM

Which you just admitted was a good thing. While stating that private/state ownership isn’t viable.

or something.

WryTrvllr on January 27, 2016 at 5:06 PM

How much is that rafting permit? BTW.

WryTrvllr on January 27, 2016 at 5:07 PM

Interesting that neither Breitbart nor Lucianne are covering this story, but HuffPo is — and boy, the people commenting on the article on the HuffPo are ecstatic over a Right Winger getting shot to death. Nice folks…

EasyEight on January 27, 2016 at 5:09 PM

Tlaloc: easy. You have said that Medal of Honor winners, even those who jump on grenades and save their fellow soldiers, do nothing worthy of respect or honor and in fact do more harm than good. And you’ve praised Occupy Wall Street, which was well known for raping women in their rape tents as well as peeing and pooping on police cars. Plus you’ve outright endorsed rioting with Ferguson and baltimore being justified and a great response to police thuggery.

But these guys in Oregon? I do believe you’ve said they should be shot on sight, as armed rebels or something similar.

Vanceone on January 27, 2016 at 3:43 PM

1) you’re closest on the medal of honor stuff, that actually has a similarity to what I said, though still exaggerated.

2) I don’t recall praising Occupy Wallstreet in general.

3) I don’t recall endorsing riots in those cases, though I have said it is understandable why they happen. you inability to tell the difference there is not my fault.

4) Definitely never said the guys here in oregon should be shot on sight.

So again who is this ‘Tlaloc’ who you say said these things, because it wasn’t me.

Tlaloc on January 27, 2016 at 5:20 PM

rafting permit? BTW.
WryTrvllr on January 27, 2016 at 5:07 PM

I’m seeing $100 per person charge from the park if you go/lead yourself. For a privately run company, prices run close to $700 per person and up, starting at the three-day trip.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 5:22 PM

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/meet-oregons-new-militiaman-leader

New leadership.

Sorry these are all from TPM; they’re the only ones regularly updating on my feed.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 5:26 PM

I’m seeing $100 per person charge from the park if you go/lead yourself. For a privately run company, prices run close to $700 per person and up, starting at the three-day trip.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 5:22 PM

Now, IIRC the waiting list is extensive, the start dates fixed in stone.

And the best the NPS can get is 100$ per person.

Why, that’s almost like charging $2 per AUM

WryTrvllr on January 27, 2016 at 5:40 PM

Curious if you had a chance to actually see any of the Occupy sites in person?

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 4:08 PM

I didn’t go. Didn’t seem worth getting my smartphone and laptop stolen and my car shat upon.

The vast vast vast majority of those involved were not raping or murdering anyone.

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 4:12 PM

If the number is not zero, then there are violent crimes taking place in Occupy, and no violent crimes taking place in Oregon.

So for our conversation – our reasonable one – you actually were the one who bought up Occupy.

verbaluce on January 27, 2016 at 4:25 PM

I did not bring up Occupy. I responded to something you said. The only thing you established is that you were talking about Occupy in relation to someone else’s comment. It does not change the fact that I was responding to you, and not introducing a new subject.

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 5:45 PM

4) Definitely never said the guys here in oregon should be shot on sight.

So again who is this ‘Tlaloc’ who you say said these things, because it wasn’t me.

Tlaloc on January 27, 2016 at 5:20 PM

There was a time at the original time of the occupation that CivilDiscourse made a reference to this and got put in the HA gulag for his efforts.

But you’re the same people so you’re still responsible for what he said.

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 5:46 PM

Schaef

How very dishonest of you to pretend this while ignoring the context and meaning of the conditional statement I made. I see you, and understand how you are.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 6:06 PM

WryTrvllr
Private enterprise makes it more expensive and exclusive, by comparison.
CivilDiscours

Lack of competition makes things expensive shite bag

Mr Soames on January 27, 2016 at 6:20 PM

Lack of competition makes things expensive shite bag

Mr Soames on January 27, 2016 at 6:20 PM

The real world is more complicated than your econ 101 course.

Tlaloc on January 27, 2016 at 6:24 PM

Soames

Your astute observation is the exact opposite of the facts that I gave.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 6:28 PM

Here’s a hint: the gov doesn’t need to increase the margin to turn a profit. The private companies, all of whom have competition on the river, do need that increase to improve the bottom line.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 6:34 PM

How very dishonest of you to pretend this while ignoring the context and meaning of the conditional statement I made. I see you, and understand how you are.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 6:06 PM

The only thing I said is that the comment in question is yours and not Tlaloc’s. That is a simple statement of fact.

I noted that you got a Jazz Vacation for the comment. Again, that is a statement of fact, beyond dispute.

If you want to fight about the interpretation of your comment, go fight with Jazz about it. I don’t really care about your motives, or your subsequent butthurt; they’re not relevant to the basic fact that Tlaloc was not the source of that comment.

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 6:46 PM

Here’s a hint: the gov doesn’t need to increase the margin to turn a profit. The private companies, all of whom have competition on the river, do need that increase to improve the bottom line.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 6:34 PM

I gotta say, you’re the first person I’ve seen argue that it is a basic function of economics to increase prices in order to attract customers away from your competition.

In any event, the reason the government “doesn’t need to” turn a profit is because they are content to spend hundreds of billions more every year than they take in as revenue. If a company ran those kind of losses consistently, year after year, the executives would either be out of business or in prison. So I’m not sure the capacity to ignore economic realities or long term consequences of debt is exactly something to promote your business model.

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 6:55 PM

Here’s a hint: the gov doesn’t need to increase the margin to turn a profit. The private companies, all of whom have competition on the river, do need that increase to improve the bottom line.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 6:34 PM

So the .gov still turns a profit on grazing land at $1.40 per AUM when, let’s face it, there is no other use for that property. Unless someone wants to create a new, people excluded, wild life refuge.

Is that what you just said?

WryTrvllr on January 27, 2016 at 7:09 PM

The real world is more complicated than your econ 101 course.
Tlaloc on January 27, 2016 at 6:24 PM

Ha ha, you effing moron useful idiot

It’s really not that complicated

But shite heads like your masters would like you to think that

Your programming is complete

Mr Soames on January 27, 2016 at 7:47 PM

The real world is more complicated than your econ 101 course.
Tlaloc on January 27, 2016 at 6:24 PM

A capitalistic free market is the enemy of the tyrant but ally of the individual

Suck that beotch

Mr Soames on January 27, 2016 at 7:49 PM

Schaef

No, you twisted my original statement, which was: “If the militia aren’t shot on sight, then they received different treatment from LEOs than did Tamir Rice,” into my calling for the militia to be shot on sight. Clearly different, unless your reading comprehension is compromised.

Jazz quickly reversed his decision, because he was more concerned with who was doing the shooting in my conditional statement, the FBI or private citizens, for obvious reasons. And he’s fair-minded, much to his credit.

You, however, are nowhere near fair minded—though you pretend to be—while you hypocritically chastise other commenters when you see your holier-than-thou opportunity. You’re the worst kind of hypocrite: a self-righteous one; you’ve proved it time and again in our interactions, most notably when you complain to be misrepresented, and then turn around and misrepresent others when it suits you. And when you bring up a month-old, totally resolved misunderstanding to make a cheap and false point.

You can take your lying, condescending hypocrisy and shove it up your ar$e sideways.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 7:54 PM

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 7:54 PM

Drink drano scum

Mr Soames on January 27, 2016 at 8:00 PM

And when you bring up a month-old, totally resolved misunderstanding to make a cheap and false point.

The point that the comment was yours and not Tlaloc’s?

Can you explain to me how that is false? Or why your moaning about interpretation affects the identity of the author at all?

The Schaef on January 27, 2016 at 8:03 PM

^ *Drano. It’s a brand name, so it gets capitalized. You’re welcome.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 8:04 PM

^ *Drano. It’s a brand name, so it gets capitalized. You’re welcome.
CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 8:04 PM

As long as you ingest it, I’m fine with the grammar

Drink deep tool

Mr Soames on January 27, 2016 at 8:06 PM

Make syntax great again.

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 8:08 PM

Make syntax great again.
CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 8:08 PM

Noam might excell in such things but it doesn’t mean he doesn’t deserve a bayonet

Mr Soames on January 27, 2016 at 8:12 PM

As a former veteran officer a few points.

1. This was not a “traffic stop”. This was a planned and staged felony stop. Traffic stops deal with the average citizen. These guys were armed and belligerent.

2. Why the Bundys were out of the refuge is beyond me. The FBI was just waiting for the opportunity to flex its muscles.

3. Shooting an unarmed man, regardless of whether he is charging you is a bad thing if he is black. (ask the officer arrested for murder in the Scott shooting) If the guy is a white guy and is a federally identified “whacko” all is good.

Did they not have bean bag shotguns, tasers, hand to hand training, an ASP? (I know, they would be asking if the victim was black..but)

Again- Orwell speaks. “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

4. Now the daddy Bundy will go next, his sons in jail and shot. That is how the leviathan that is the federal government works.

I have said this here and other places, do not confront the officers sent by the administrators who made the decisions you are complaining about. The officer more than likely agrees with YOU!

This is like a rabid dog analogy, with the officers being the teeth. If a dog tries to bite you, you don’t make the goal to break the teeth off to stop the threat right? No. you have to stop the dog.

Cruz will go a long way to do that.

archer52 on January 27, 2016 at 9:19 PM

2. Why the Bundys were out of the refuge is beyond me. The FBI was just waiting for the opportunity to flex its muscles.

Supposedly they were on their way to a public meeting.

If that’s true, were they travelling under what they thought was a safe conduct from any sort of government entity? If so, that puts a whole new treacherous complexion on things. I expect we’ll ind out at trial. I also expect that if it turns out they were, it will prove to be a law enforcement blunder of EPIC proportions.

SDN on January 27, 2016 at 10:12 PM

Soames
*excel

CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 10:51 PM

Make syntax great again.
.
CivilDiscourse on January 27, 2016 at 8:08 PM

.
Make people FREE as INDIVIDUALS again.

listens2glenn on January 27, 2016 at 11:02 PM

listens2glenn on January 27, 2016 at 11:02 PM

Sounds good. What are you not free to do that you want to do?

CivilDiscourse on January 28, 2016 at 12:51 AM

CivilDiscourse on January 28, 2016 at 12:51 AM

.
Purchase firearms and ammunition, with all of the ease of buying any other power tools.

Allow school children to express appreciation for firearms and shooting IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS. That means drawing pictures of guns, wearing clothing with firearms logos on it, and playing “cops ‘n’ robbers” or “cowboys ‘n’ indians” during recess.

I’d like to access my favorite hunting and fishing places, where it requires TRESPASSING on railroad property, and other commercial-industrial property.

Get into the electrical construction & maintenance field … WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY SOME TRADE/TECHNICAL INSTITUTE FOR THE “PRIVILEGE”.

Launch rocket-propelled fireworks on the 4th of July, without having to get a “license.”

Express the good news of Jesus Christ, in all possible ways, ON AND ABOUT ALL PUBLIC PROPERTY AND GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS.
.
.
This is just a quick, partial list, that can probably go on forever

listens2glenn on January 28, 2016 at 1:19 AM

Sounds good. What are you not free to do that you want to do?

CivilDiscourse on January 28, 2016 at 12:51 AM

open a foreign bank account and move 50% of my net worth off shore?

WryTrvllr on January 28, 2016 at 8:17 AM

put in a fishing pond.

do the wiring in my own home.

and use romex.

buy a 100 watt incandescent bulb for 40 cents, cause it’s 30 F outside and that heat isn’t wasted.

Not register my bicycle

buy 95% everclear in case there wasn’t enough sugar in the must to start with.

Be able to keep more than 2 days worth of perch in my freezer.

let the contracted trash haulers sort out the aluminum.

spend less than 1 hour or 1 day’s salary doing my taxes.

own a car that can’t be remotely hacked, and a TV that won’t report my viewing preferences

know my phone calls and e-mails are private..

these are a few of my favorite things

WryTrvllr on January 28, 2016 at 8:34 AM

Sounds good. What are you not free to do that you want to do?
.
CivilDiscourse on January 28, 2016 at 12:51 AM

.
open a foreign bank account and move 50% of my net worth off shore?
.
WryTrvllr on January 28, 2016 at 8:17 AM

.
I don’t have enough to be worth moving, dammit . . . . . but it’s great addition to the list.

listens2glenn on January 28, 2016 at 8:58 AM

I don’t have enough to be worth moving, dammit . . . . . but it’s great addition to the list.

listens2glenn on January 28, 2016 at 8:58 AM

And I forgot one.

Drive around with 5000$ cash in my car, and be able to at some point deposit it into a bank.

WryTrvllr on January 28, 2016 at 9:03 AM

Sounds good. What are you not free to do that you want to do?

CivilDiscourse on January 28, 2016 at 12:51 AM

these are a few of my favorite things

WryTrvllr on January 28, 2016 at 8:34 AM

That’s an excellent start.

Don’t forget negotiating your own private contract between yourself and your insurance company, and having your self-defense licenses in one state honored in another state.

The Schaef on January 28, 2016 at 9:49 AM

The Schaef on January 28, 2016 at 9:49 AM

.
Let’s go further than that … we shouldn’t even NEED “self-defense licenses”.
.
The list of things we can add to the answer of CivilDiscourse’s original question…

CivilDiscourse on January 28, 2016 at 12:51 AM


.
…is gonna reach around the freakin’ earth.

We should get everyone else at Hotair to add to it, including Ed, Allah’, and Jazz.

listens2glenn on January 28, 2016 at 1:28 PM

…do the wiring in my own home, and use romex…
.
WryTrvllr on January 28, 2016 at 8:34 AM

.
?

What do they require, where you live?

listens2glenn on January 28, 2016 at 1:32 PM

Let’s go further than that … we shouldn’t even NEED “self-defense licenses”.

listens2glenn on January 28, 2016 at 1:28 PM

Maybe we do, maybe we don’t. Either way, if I have a CCW or even an open carry license in one state, put an unloaded gun in my glove box, and travel over state lines where the laws are more strict and my license is not recognized, if I get pulled over I’m suddenly looking at felony possession charge. So now I’m looking at jail time, and even if the judge is lenient, a felony conviction closes more windows of opportunity than one can count.

So one can argue whether the act of licensing thwarts 2A or not, but even conceding the point, we are not given the equal protection the 14th is supposed to grant for the licenses issued in our home state.

The Schaef on January 28, 2016 at 4:17 PM

The Schaef on January 28, 2016 at 4:17 PM

.
I know … just like that single mom from Philadelphia, who honestly thought she was legal when she crossed over into NJ.

listens2glenn on January 28, 2016 at 4:46 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4