http://news.yahoo.com/peaceful-protest-f...53717.html


Don't know much about the situation but it doesn't sound good.

---

Here's what it's about..........

 

Dwight Hammond, 73, and Steven Hammond, 46, said they lit the fires in 2001 and 2006 to reduce the growth of invasive plants and protect their property from wildfires.

The two were convicted of the arsons three years ago and served time — the father three months, the son one year. But a judge ruled their terms were too short under federal law and ordered them back to prison for about four years each.

 

They're trying to keep the feds from putting these two back in prison......

---

Wants to join the "cereal box" dating service. I've dated enough flakes and nuts...all I want is the prize now.

Yea but the Hammond's have released statements saying they do not wish for armed involvement and are turning themselves in on the 4th.


Looks more like the son of the Bundy rancher trying to pick a fight. I'm as anti-fed as they get but this is stupid he's daring the feds to come in Waco style that's the last thing we need.


On the other hand they make completely valid points about the land grab by the feds out west, it is ridiculous and something should be done about it but this is probably the worse possible thing anyone could do.

---

Well, obviously, you aren't allowed to set fires on land you do not own.   And equally obviously, you shouldn't be allowed to take over a government building by armed force.   I don't endorse either one of those actions. 

 

But on the other hand, it is interesting to say the least that a judge can rule they weren't sentenced to enough time originally, and sentence them to more time. 

---

I think they where trying to keep this quite in hopes of just waiting it out but twitter was blowing it up with information this morning

---

Cowards and borderline terrorists. The inevitable follow up to the Bundy ranch fiasco. Let people get away with this stuff and they do it again.


Where is the the right wing community saying enough is enough and condemning these acts? If we just call it what it is it will all be fine. /s

---

Cowards and borderline terrorists. The inevitable follow up to the Bundy ranch fiasco. Let people get away with this stuff and they do it again.


Where is the the right wing community saying enough is enough and condemning these acts? If we just call it what it is it will all be fine. /s

I'm right wing and I'll say their way out of line, even if the grivences are just you dont take a federal building with and armed populace and expect good results

---

I say it's time for another revolution and this may be the beginning of it..........

---

Wants to join the "cereal box" dating service. I've dated enough flakes and nuts...all I want is the prize now.

I say it's time for another revolution and this may be the beginning of it..........

 

Uh..no.

---

I say it's time for another revolution and this may be the beginning of it..........

No its not and the last thing you want is militia as the back bone of a "revolution" its such a mixed bag you wouldn't have any idea who is fighting who

---

Here's an interesting article that details some of the motivations of the people who are doing this. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/...ge%2Fstory

 

BURNS, Ore. — B.J. Soper has seen the frustration building for years in this rural corner of Oregon.

The federal government owns more than half the land in the state, as it does across much of the West. It used to be routine for ranchers to get permits to graze cattle or cut timber or work mines — a way to make a living from the land.

Then came increasing environmental regulations, and the federal land became more for owls and sage grouse than for local people trying to feed their families, said Soper, 39, who lives 100 miles up the road in Bend.

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

If you look at a map of the land that is owned by the government (or, as some like to put it, all the people of the United States), you can see that the federal government owns what looks like half or most of the land in some western states.  

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=map+of+f...kz7tjyw%3D

 

And as environmental regulations increase, people slowly get squeezed out of doing things they have done legally for decades. 

 

So, even if you don't agree with these people and want to call them terrorists and wackos, it is always helpful to try to understand their motivations.  

---

Here's an interesting article that details some of the motivations of the people who are doing this.

<a class="bbc_url" href='https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/in-oregon-frustration-over-federal-land-rights-has-been-building-for-years/2016/01/04/9bc905a2-b330-11e5-a76a-0b5145e8679a_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_oregon-standoff-930pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory'>https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/in-oregon-frustration-over-federal-land-rights-has-been-building-for-years/2016/01/04/9bc905a2-b330-11e5-a76a-0b5145e8679a_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_oregon-standoff-930pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory</a>


BURNS, Ore. — B.J. Soper has seen the frustration building for years in this rural corner of Oregon.

The federal government owns more than half the land in the state, as it does across much of the West. It used to be routine for ranchers to get permits to graze cattle or cut timber or work mines — a way to make a living from the land.

Then came increasing environmental regulations, and the federal land became more for owls and sage grouse than for local people trying to feed their families, said Soper, 39, who lives 100 miles up the road in Bend.


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


If you look at a map of the land that is owned by the government (or, as some like to put it, all the people of the United States), you can see that the federal government owns what looks like half or most of the land in some western states.

<a class="bbc_url" href='https://www.google.com/search?q=map+of+federal+land+ownership&tbm=isch&imgil=3nT3Bd8yVkWhBM%253A%253BpbeJtgWXS_1jaM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.nrcs.usda.gov%25252Fwps%25252Fportal%25252Fnrcs%25252Fdetail%25252Fin%25252Fprograms%25252F%25253Fcid%2525253Dnrcs143_013848&source=iu&pf=m&fir=3nT3Bd8yVkWhBM%253A%252CpbeJtgWXS_1jaM%252C_&biw=1280&bih=663&usg=__04RruL2VXHwDf-8Q5t6fkz7tjyw%3D&ved=0ahUKEwijlqedz5LKAhUW5mMKHbcqBDQQyjcIJg&ei=06-LVuPgMZbMjwO31ZCgAw#imgrc=3nT3Bd8yVkWhBM%3A&usg=__04RruL2VXHwDf-8Q5t6fkz7tjyw%3D'>https://www.google.com/search?q=map+of+federal+land+ownership&tbm=isch&imgil=3nT3Bd8yVkWhBM%253A%253BpbeJtgWXS_1jaM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.nrcs.usda.gov%25252Fwps%25252Fportal%25252Fnrcs%25252Fdetail%25252Fin%25252Fprograms%25252F%25253Fcid%2525253Dnrcs143_013848&source=iu&pf=m&fir=3nT3Bd8yVkWhBM%253A%252CpbeJtgWXS_1jaM%252C_&biw=1280&bih=663&usg=__04RruL2VXHwDf-8Q5t6fkz7tjyw%3D&ved=0ahUKEwijlqedz5LKAhUW5mMKHbcqBDQQyjcIJg&ei=06-LVuPgMZbMjwO31ZCgAw#imgrc=3nT3Bd8yVkWhBM%3A&usg=__04RruL2VXHwDf-8Q5t6fkz7tjyw%3D</a>


And as environmental regulations increase, people slowly get squeezed out of doing things they have done legally for decades.


So, even if you don't agree with these people and want to call them terrorists and wackos, it is always helpful to try to understand their motivations.

100% understand their frustrations and agree with them completley I just don't see the purpose in this specific move and see it as a bad tactic. There's no clear achievable goal, what's the plan hold this one building until they change the government? The bundy ranch incident was different they had an achievable goal, get the cattle back.


This move just plays into the DOJ narrative about right wing terroism and justifies their surveillance of right wing groups. To effectively and peacefully resist the state you have to be smart and pick and choose battles.

---

100% understand their frustrations and agree with them completley I just don't see the purpose in this specific move and see it as a bad tactic. There's no clear achievable goal, what's the plan hold this one building until they change the government? The bundy ranch incident was different they had an achievable goal, get the cattle back.


This move just plays into the DOJ narrative about right wing terroism and justifies their surveillance of right wing groups. To effectively and peacefully resist the state you have to be smart and pick and choose battles.

 

I understand their motivations but I would not say I agree with their motivations.  I would want to know more about exactly what regulations have changed, why they changed, and more about how that impacted the lives of the people affected.   Just because regulations affect people, that doesn't mean we should not have regulations.   There are costs and benefits to everything, and I don't think I know enough to say whether we should tighten the regulations on use of federal land or not.   The problem is, since federal land belongs to all the people, that means that federal land in Idaho belongs to a person living in Boston as much as it belongs to a person living in Idaho.   Right or wrong, federal land belongs to everyone, not just to people who want to graze their cattle on it.  And yet we have to understand how the people living next to federal land who have used it for generations are being squeezed out and having their lives affected.   All I'm saying is, it's not an easy issue. 

---

I'd be more sympathetic if this guy didn't also get over $500K from the government already. I think the word I hear for non-whites is "takers." It goes without saying if these guys were black or brown they'd be dead already.

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

the federal building belongs to the people

---

@kotite, you mean like the ferguson and Baltimore thugs/rioters were killed by the cops?

---

Black = thugs

Brown = terrorists

White = militia


21st century semantics.

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

Black = thugs

Brown = terrorists

White = militia


21st century semantics.

 

yes its all that simple.

---

Tamir Rice was holding a toy gun in an open carry state where people go into Chili's with AR-15s strapped to their backs. He was black. Therefore he was a "thug" and shot on sight. A bunch of white people with guns take over a building and everyone wants to talk it out. Seems simple enough.

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

Tamir Rice was holding a toy gun in an open carry state where people go into Chili's with AR-15s strapped to their backs. He was black. Therefore he was a "thug" and shot on sight. A bunch of white people with guns take over a building and everyone wants to talk it out. Seems simple enough.

Whatever.

---