Quote from: Chef Ramsay on April 29, 2014, 08:58:25 PM

Quote from: tvbcof on April 29, 2014, 08:18:02 PM

BTW...

Quote from: AnonyMint on April 29, 2014, 09:18:43 AM

...
And Bundy has said he will pay the grazing fees to Clark county.
...

It's like any low-life saying they will happily pay for the the car they stole, but only to a specific pet rock as soon as it sends a bill.

The state and county don't have the legal means to take the money and Bundy knows this. He thinks he's being cute and clever, but most people including his fellow ranchers see things for what they are: Bundy's a greedy self-serving welfare deadbeat suckling off the public teat. And now he's a political liability as well.

In the interviews that I've heard Bundy in, he matter of factly calls this area state land that has been usurped by the Feds over time. I'm late to this topic but the man's family has been ranching there for over a century and this BLM outfit has been in existence since ~1981.

Bundy matter-of-factly lies as do most deadbeats.

It's a documented fact that the Federal govt bought territories which eventually became most of the Western states. IIRC, in the case of NV, it is written into their constitution that there is a lot of Federal land within their borders. They are welcome to work on changing that if they wish, and I honestly would like to see them do it.

It's a documented fact that Bundy's mommy and daddy bought what is currently his 140 acres from a different family after WWII. The didn't start running cattle at all until the 50's. 1950's.

It's a documented fact that the BLM was instituted within a year of Bundy's birth and prior to that there were other government bodies which had various jurisdictional duties over the land.

After Bundy's '1870's lie was exposed he didn't have much to say in his defense. I guess he's trying to argue that some Mormons or some honkys or whatever used some land somewhere West of ol'Miss to graze some ungulates for personal gain, and that gives him the right to do whatever he wants on the 600,000 acres near his mellon patch. It's a lame argument. I, for one, am disgusted by that sense of entitlement that moochers of all stripe try to put forward.

Quote from: Chef Ramsay on April 29, 2014, 08:58:25 PM

This land is what has been known as open/free range for a long time and it's clear that the Feds have been trying to put the squeeze on all ranchers in the area for years. And, part of the issue here is that it is in fact public land. If it was private then there would be no dispute. However, despite the fact that NV has allowed the Feds to take ~90% of the state over there should still have been a clause that allows for the random public to do whatever peaceful activities they want. Not to mention the grazing rights this family has earned through making use out of the land for all this time. Plus, initially the cover story was to protect the desert tortoise but that has turned out to be a joke as anyone knows that many military/bombing exercises have occurred in these arid areas w/ said allegedly endangered species for the last 60+ years. This whole scenario is a mess started by and for the betterment of big central government.

It's a fact that the whole fucking world was 'the commons' at some point. Some places, like most of Mongolia, still are. As population patterns change, the viability of a 'commons' land utilization scheme changes. That is a historical fact that many individuals and societies have had to deal with.

Bundy choose to lease land from the owner (me as a member of the public) via grazing fees. It's a logical choice that tens of thousands of ranchers make. Why? Because the owners give them one hell of a deal relative to market value of private land.

The downside of not owning land is that you don't get to make the rules. Even if the owner decided to stop utilizing ALL of it as active rangeland for grazing, that's their right as the owners. We are a capitalist economy with relatively strong property ownership rights and not some nanny state for deadbeat ranchers. Bundy should do one of the following:

- Adjust his operation to make use of the land that the owner wants to make available as working range-land.

- Stop running cattle and be content raising mellons in HIS land.

- Move to somewhere where the govt is still willing to support his lifestyle with highly subsidized land if he's addicted to welfare.

- Run for office or organize politically for the change he wants (as have done the dopers in CO for instance.)