-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Bunkerville NV escalating.
- Thread starter Rhoadmar
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Finally? Waco was televised LIVE. That had actual merit, this doesn't seem to pass muster.
Agreed.
BLM has an obligation under the endangered species act to remove the cattle to protect the grazing land for the desert turtle, and will remove the cattle under the court order issued in 1998
Bunnykid68
Grandmaster
They jacked his rates up to over $300 a head to try and force him out like they have done every other rancher in the area, he is fighting back. What would you do if your property taxes went from $100 a month to $500 a month, just pay them and be happy that you get to rent the land you built your house on, from the state?
Now that is the crux of the argument. If he had of made this argument, that he was being extorted, I'd sympathize. However, he's flatout saying it's his property to use as he will. The fact that he did pay to the feds, makes his argument really weak. For the history buffs, the federal government does in fact own the land. The land that is now Nevada, became ours, after the Mexican-American War, via the Treaty of Hidalgo, at a cost of $15M. Now, unless there was a waiting list for ownership prior to the treaty, that makes the land FIRMLY US Government, controlled and owned, soil.
Bunnykid68
Grandmaster
So he is claiming ownership of it?
It IS his property. Partly. More like ours. But I guess we've become so accustom to thinking of this government of the people as "them" that we don't think of public resources as "ours". No. You said it. It's theirs. They've been making that very clear.
public servant
Grandmaster
Since it's "ours"...he needs to ask permission to use "my" part of it. Especially is he's making a profit off it.
I don't think anyone should be allowed to make a profit off public lands. Not even .gov by leasing it out.
public servant
Grandmaster
His use of the land wasn't my point. The point was the words Kut used, and all of us really, show that we no longer think in terms of ours. It's their land. It's their resources. It's Harry Reid's Resources because he has the power.
I haven't decided yet how much blame I place on Bundy. Just that it's somewhere between some and half. If his family really bought the rights to the land and they jacked the fees up to get rid of the ranchers, and this latest standoff was really about Harry Reid helping his son get the Chinese their $5b solar farm, I'd blame Bundy less. If it's just about him not paying reasonable and customary land use fees, then of course, more.
+1 Poptab. Lift the patent moratorium that Bill Clinton put on the public land. If you don't know what patented land is, you're missing out on how the government controls 80% of the land out here. I am just south of Nevada and BLM has SWAT teams and MRAP's just like the other jackbooted thugs. Most of their employees, (public servants), have that jackboot mentality. BLM does everything they can to stop ranching and mining in the west. They are Anti-American to the bone and exist only for the benefit of foreign treaties. It has become 800% worse under Obama. Mining maintenance fees have increased as much as 800% and is destroying small mining in the west. BLM gets 800% more in fees and now has that much larger budget to terrorize us.
I'm not buying the whole Chinese solar power thing. There are millions of acres in uncontested government hands right now. It isn't like they're seizing this land or something, the government already owns it. Seems it would have been easier to move a few miles in any direction away from the rancher and use that land instead for whatever scheme they may have.
What makes this piece of ground so supposedly extra desirable for Reid and friends?
What makes this piece of ground so supposedly extra desirable for Reid and friends?
Land law and rights are far more complex in western states. Surface rights, grazing rights, water rights, minerals rights, just to name a few and each of those rights can be owned by many different people. If you are familiar with the Stock raising and homestead act of 1916, you could get a parcel of ground for raising and grazing your cattle, unless you specifically bought the mineral rights, they were retained by the United States of America. For example, I own wells that are on land owned by someone else.
That's insightful, and a fair assessment. We shouldn't look at it as "their" land. It is indeed our land as much as theirs. The problem is how this land is administrated for fair use for all. Traditionally, many homesteaders abused the system when it was "our" land, and the feds stepped in.... but they've, admittedly gotten out of control. This is why people support Bundy, nit because he has the right of it, but because people think overall the feds are out of control. While I don't quite believe there should not be property owned by the govt, I do have issue with them restricting use of the open range. But an open range, must be "open" to all. Bundy isn't playing by those rules. He sees this particular piece of "open range," as open to him, but closed to everybody else. He has said that this disputed piece of land, has been "in his family" for over a hundred years. He also says that he is willing to pay the state of Nevada for it's use, but not the federal govt. It clear that he's saying that at least one entity of govt has the ability to own, lease, and to his benefit RESTRICT use of said public lands. This is why I don't support him. He would be the first to say "I got rites to dis lan from teh gubmint, so yous better git." He's not standing up for "our"property, he's standing up for his sole right to use it from whichever entity (state or fed) gives him the best deal.
