43
   

Hundreds of Armed Right-Wing Militia Members Take Over Federal Building

 
 
BillRM
 
  -2  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 07:47 am
@maxdancona,
It sound like the family in the middle of this conflict is getting a raw deal and the any arm protectors are not helping the matter.

However

Quote:


http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/peaceful-protest-oregon-wildlife-refuge-action-36061121

A peaceful protest Saturday in support of an eastern Oregon ranching family facing jail time for arson was followed shortly afterward by an occupation of a building at a national wildlife refuge.

Ammon Bundy, the son of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who was involved in a standoff with the government over grazing rights, told The Oregonian that he and two of his brothers were among a group of dozens of people occupying the headquarters of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

Ammon Bundy posted a video on his Facebook page asking
0 Replies
 
jcboy
 
  8  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 08:50 am
So an armed group of right-wing nuts (aka conservative Republicans) have occupied a federal building in Oregon to make some stupid point about hating the federal government. White American terrorists with easy access to army-grade weaponry because of the absence of gun control, God bless America!
Blickers
 
  3  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 09:08 am
One thing about the title though-when you say "Federal Building" you think of a large building in the middle of a city with streets and traffic going all around it. Not some small houselike structure stuck alone miles out in the middle of the wilderness that hardly anybody knows exists.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  6  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 09:42 am
Meanwhile in Burns...

https://www.balloon-juice.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/hammonds-militia-7705e873521c2e16-600x450.jpg

http://cdn.tegna-tv.com/-mm-/b7960ab8fc77c896acc5b16142a676498dede9dd/c=1-0-600-450&r=x408&c=540x405/local/-/media/2016/01/02/KTVB/KTVB/635873710352710627-burns-militia1.jpg
Blickers
 
  1  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 09:49 am
@boomerang,
This is the second time I have ever heard of Burns, Oregon. The first was when the Jets got QB Kellen Clemens in the draft for several years. He's notable for being able to stay in the NFL for 10 years despite never being good enough to actually win a starting job.
Lash
 
  1  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 10:01 am
@jcboy,
Or, some Americans are protesting peacefully against what they consider gross maltreatment by their government in an area that allows open carry.

Isn't protest a right?

I don't even know the whole story, so I'm not on any side of this story, but it is disheartening to see people automatically line up in the political lines I always see them in.

maxdancona
 
  3  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 10:10 am
@Lash,
This is a silly story being hyped out by both sides of the political aisle.

The right wants to make this a national news story to show how crazy the government is. The left wants to make this a national news story to show how crazy the right is.

What's the story here? Trespassing?

This should not be national news. If we just ignored this, handled it locally, it would just go away. Instead we are giving the hysterical voices on both sides a big microphone.

ossobuco
 
  3  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 10:11 am
I don't like occupying buildings for protest. I didn't like it when students I tended to agree with occupied the UCLA Administration Building in the early seventies; I didn't like it when Governor Reagan shut down the whole campus; I don't like anyone of whatever point of view occupying a Federal Building, however small.
boomerang
 
  8  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 10:12 am
@Blickers,
We've driven through there. It is really remote.

Some interesting backstory:

Quote:
The jury convicted both of the Hammonds of using fire to destroy federal property for a 2001 arson known as the Hardie-Hammond Fire, located in the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area. Witnesses at trial, including a relative of the Hammonds, testified the arson occurred shortly after Steven Hammond and his hunting party illegally slaughtered several deer on BLM property. Jurors were told that Steven Hammond handed out “Strike Anywhere” matches with instructions that they be lit and dropped on the ground because they were going to “light up the whole country on fire.” One witness testified that he barely escaped the eight to ten foot high flames caused by the arson. The fire consumed 139 acres of public land and destroyed all evidence of the game violations. After committing the arson, Steven Hammond called the BLM office in Burns, Oregon and claimed the fire was started on Hammond property to burn off invasive species and had inadvertently burned onto public lands. Dwight and Steven Hammond told one of their relatives to keep his mouth shut and that nobody needed to know about the fire.

The jury also convicted Steven Hammond of using fire to destroy federal property regarding a 2006 arson known as the Krumbo Butte Fire located in the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge and Steen Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area. An August lightning storm started numerous fires and a burn ban was in effect while BLM firefighters fought those fires. Despite the ban, without permission or notification to BLM, Steven Hammond started several “back fires” in an attempt save the ranch’s winter feed. The fires burned onto public land and were seen by BLM firefighters camped nearby. The firefighters took steps to ensure their safety and reported the arsons.

By law, arson on federal land carries a five-year mandatory minimum sentence.


http://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/eastern-oregon-ranchers-convicted-arson-resentenced-five-years-prison
Lash
 
  1  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 10:18 am
@ossobuco,
I thought it was brave as hell when my bro Bernie and other students occupied admin buildings. If the cause is just, and if they remain peaceful through whatever happens, including arrest, this helps to shine a spotlight on what's happening in our country.

I think protests like these should be given press. I'd be much more concerned if they were blacked out,...you know, like the Sanders campaign.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 10:30 am
@Lash,
It's now on the frontpages of most German (online) media as well - even breaking news for some.
0 Replies
 
Kolyo
 
  6  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 10:32 am
When you seize a building at gunpoint and threaten violence against authorities who might try to remove you, that is not a "peaceful" protest.
BillRM
 
  2  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 10:34 am
@boomerang,
Thank for the back story but I still have a problem going back to a settle matter years later and increasing the punishment.

Next it is my understanding that Federal judges by a SC ruling can go below minimum sentencing if they find reasons to do so.
ossobuco
 
  2  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 10:38 am
@Lash,
Will agree to disagree.. re the building occupation -
a guy I like was one of the twelve who occupied (he worked in our lab and told us about it later). I don't like universities shutting down. Education matters too much to me. My uni education was free except for a small fee and buying books, but it isn't free there now, after Reagan. I'm with Bernie Sanders on availability of free education...
I'm not opposed to marches/walks, etc. - just to occupying buildings and campus shut down.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 10:39 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
Next it is my understanding that Federal judges by a SC ruling can go below minimum sentencing if they find reasons to do so.
From the "back story" posted by boomerang:
Quote:
In March 2015, the Supreme Court rejected the Hammonds’ petitions for certiorari.
BillRM
 
  1  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 10:52 am
@ossobuco,
After the Kent State Shootings the University of Miami agree to shut down for a day for student protests.

The engineering students almost to a man, few women at the time, stated that we did not agree with the shut down and if the UM did shut down we wish at least a one day rebate on our tuitions.

In the end we was told that the students and the professors could have classes on a voluntary basic.

The result we was the only school open and running that day.

Oh to punish us for not going along with the program the students council took away the funding for our school magazine.
BillRM
 
  0  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 10:55 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Given the existing SC ruling it should not have needed to be hear by the SC as lower courts should had taken care of the matter.

Be interesting to look into the legal issues of this case.
rosborne979
 
  2  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 11:00 am
@maxdancona,
It's a slow news cycle right now, so CNN probably had to choose between this and a cat video they dug up somewhere.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  6  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 11:24 am
@BillRM,
If you look at the article I linked it explains it -- everything was just winding though the courts:

Quote:
By law, arson on federal land carries a five-year mandatory minimum sentence. When the Hammonds were originally sentenced, they argued that the five-year mandatory minimum terms were unconstitutional and the trial court agreed and imposed sentences well below what the law required based upon the jury’s verdicts. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, however, upheld the federal law, reasoning that “given the seriousness of arson, a five-year sentence is not grossly disproportionate to the offense.” The court vacated the original, unlawful sentences and ordered that the Hammonds be resentenced “in compliance with the law.” In March 2015, the Supreme Court rejected the Hammonds’ petitions for certiorari. Today, Chief Judge Aiken imposed five year prison terms on each of the Hammonds, with credit for time they already served.

“We all know the devastating effects that are caused by wildfires. Fires intentionally and illegally set on public lands, even those in a remote area, threaten property and residents and endanger firefighters called to battle the blaze” stated Acting U.S. Attorney Billy Williams.

“Congress sought to ensure that anyone who maliciously damages United States’ property by fire will serve at least 5 years in prison. These sentences are intended to be long enough to deter those like the Hammonds who disregard the law and place fire fighters and others in jeopardy.”


I think it's important to note that they set the fire to cover up the crime of poaching.
Lash
 
  1  
Sun 3 Jan, 2016 11:58 am
@Kolyo,
From what I've read, "seize at gunpoint" isn't an accurate description of what's happened. I'll suspend further comment about this before continuing.
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 09:42:00