|
> SNACKS
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 22:33 |
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Well, I posted that article about how the Hammonds abused their underage relatives on Facebook, and my uncle commented ""Ten mile hike and lil sand paper never hurt anyone lol. Seems to me media trying to divert attention from the real reasons behind there harassment of this family". Though I mean, we already know that he abuses my aunt, so I guess this is less a surprise and more an unpleasant reminder. Your uncle is a lost cause, who likes hurting children.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2016 03:28
|
|
|
As a Millennial I posted:
*bird looks at camera* It's a living...
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
Crain posted:Apparently the Pacific Patriots Network hasn't actually left. This reporter is saying 15-30 still around Burns: The Bundy duders don't have the authority to tell any other group to leave.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:"They" are? The reports I've seen seem to indicate that separate, supportive groups with poorly defined ties to the occupation are doing these things. It was a while back, but did the bundy group encourage other people to drive in and join the protest/occupation/insurgency? And were disappointed when few people did at the time? If they did, then the people who came to join the occupation are in fact tied to the occupation, even if the bundy guys don't want them to after the fact.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:I would wager there's a lot of coordination. Bundy turning the "Idaho three percenters" back seemed more like optics to me than genuine opposition to armed outsiders getting involved. It's been said, but the bundy guys are armed outsiders
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Well how do you stop someone from bringing stuff to them? You can't stop them 20 miles out and force them to stop driving on the road, can you? Wouldn't you have to sent up a check point at the property and wouldn't that risk armed conflict with the militia? Signs and road spikes on the roads leading there? I'm spitballing
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
Is there a source for the whole hostage thing? There have been mumblings about them planning to take the sheriff hostage.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Just the Twitter of one of the reporters covering the conference with their 'Judge'. Is their judge one of the original insurgents? Or one that came in from elsewhere later on?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:A 'Common Law' court. There are militants patrolling the town and have pockets of local support. It's a small town too so they could probably just haul in anyone who disobeys and try/sentence them. Baby steps though. First they need to eliminate any local resistance, such as the sheriff. They don't have to actually kill him - running him out of town would probably be enough to pacify the local cops. How do they do it out in Yemen?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
I hope they leave peacefully and let the town return to normal, instead of continuing to patrol it and capturing the sheriff like they are apparently discussing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The "militants patrolling the town" are mostly unaffiliated hangers-on, who haven't done anything anyone can be charged with. They asked "patriots from all over the country" to join the fight. They're a different group but they're definitely affiliated now. They were invited there. many johnnys fucked around with this message at 01:10 on Jan 13, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 01:06
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:That's really not sufficient for a legal case and they still don't have identifiable people actually doing illegal things in town. Cruising around being a dork with your AR isn't enough without other elements. Sure, but I wasn't speaking in a legal sense. Just getting a hold of the situation: an armed gang of occupied a federal building, threatening the town, they rallied other would-be insurgents to their cause, and there are now rumblings of them wanting to, or planning to try, to take the sheriff hostage. They are now trying to set up their own court system, and have armed militants patrolling the town. I mistakenly conflated the two - it turns out that the second insurgency was merely invited by the first, but they are a separate group. Townspeople are being harassed - some explicitly and having to flee (such as the sheriff's family), others merely at random trying to go about their lives. Legalistically, I don't know what they're going to call it. But to the average person, it is what it is.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Don't do that. Don't be a sovcit. What?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
SquadronROE posted:The best thing from the last couple of days has been the use of the term "militants" to describe them Aren't they though  ??
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
BabelFish posted:The sovcit stuff has gotten bad enough that Florida made a training video explicitly for it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALPs_n0WQaY&t=442s dang that got heavy
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
BaurusJA posted:Holy poo poo the kid walked up and executed two cops? Like just defending himself wasn't enough he had to literaly execute two people in cold blood? He was defending his liberty. 
many johnnys fucked around with this message at 02:38 on Jan 14, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:What happens when the Feds trump their Super Sheriff by appointing an Uber Sheriff Times Infinity Plus One No Takebacks? What then? infinity plus two, BITCH
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:Reminder: the first time Cliven scared the federales off his case with a threat of violence was in the mid 90s. some time in the next 20 years I'm sure
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
Roland Jones posted:Yes it is. Go watch that Florida police video where the teenager gets out an assault rifle and guns down two cops, making sure to shoot them when they're down. Or the two who went from the Bundy ranch to go kill a cop in Las Vegas. Those are the kind of person doing this, and they're not only congregating in the refuge, they're patrolling the town with their weapons and scaring the hell out of its inhabitants. They're stalking government employees and their relatives. They've literally talked about lynching the sheriff. These people are a risk to both the people of Burns and themselves, and giving them free run of the town is massively irresponsible. Pulling over a sovcit 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:even if they said something threatening but made no effort to follow up on that threat with action. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
prefect posted:Can they fill the building with sleeping gas and then just drag the people out afterwards? That's not a thing
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
In video games you can use gas grenades or tranquilizer rounds and the enemy just goes "ungh" and falls asleep for a while. In real life you will do nothing, or you will suffocate or kill them.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
prefect posted:How about some type of gay bomb? done
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2016 15:48
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Rather than needing magic words to avoid the law, many sovereign citizens believe that the law doesn't apply to anyone in the first place, and that the entire modern legal system is an incredibly elaborate ruse designed to trick and intimidate people into waiving that exemption. The believe their "magic words" are just a way of exercising and defending their rights, just like a white college kid repeating "I do not consent to this search of my vehicle" over and over as a cop reaches for the bag of weed under the driver's seat. To them, being arrested and hauled into court is just the state putting on a show of legal theater to scare them into accepting the court's authority. Typically a sovereign citizen believer's brush with the system is something minor like traffic tickets or unpaid taxes, so it's not often they get tazed or jailed; when they do, they believe it's police brutality or illegal confinement and hold faith that their magic words will get the cops and the court punished for this so-called abuse. Yeah, it's like that idea that a company or person can't force you do do anything you didn't agree to, and if you won't want to play by their rules you can just not sign the contract. They argue that since they didn't agree to the contract, they're not bound by the terms of it. Except the contract is the social contract, and the government doesn't work that way. I'm fond of that one legal paper penned by an Alberta judge: Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571. (and here's a pdf link). Frustrated by the phenomenon, he dissects it. quote:[395] OPCA litigants who adopt this scheme tend to identify practically any state document, even a driver’s license or a birth certificate, as a contract. CERI members explain that is the reason why they do not use driver’s licenses or license plates. They argue, in effect, that they do not wish to be in a contract with the state, and should be able to engage in activities, for example operation of a motor vehicle, without being bound to the state in that manner. He also gets in some pretty good burns. quote:[80] When gurus do appear in court their schemes uniformly fail, which is why most leave court appearances to their customers. That explains why it is not unusual to find that an OPCA litigant cannot even explain their own materials. They did not write them. They do not (fully) understand them. OPCA litigants appear, engage in a court drama that is more akin to a magic spell ritual than an actual legal proceeding, and wait to see if the court is entranced and compliant. If not, the litigant returns home to scrutinize at what point the wrong incantation was uttered, an incorrectly prepared artifact waved or submitted. quote:[434] As previously explained, Mr. Meads subscribes to the idea that the non-corporeal aspect of himself was created by the state (or alternatively by me, on June 8, 2012). He must believe he nevertheless has ‘signing authority’ over that other personality because in his “power of attorney” he, as “DENNIS LARRY MEADS, Debtor and Grantor”, authorizes his “attorney-in-fact”, “Dennis-Larry: Meads, Secured Party Creditor” total control over his affairs. Presumably, the ‘corporate entity’ is now a puppet for the physical person.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
If they sent $1000 of whiskey instead, the standoff might very well be over by now
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Intel&Sebastian posted:I don't buy the idea that its impossible for the FBI of all people to cut power to one remote set of buildings without affecting people 30 miles away but whatever. If they had guys go to the site, they could cut power to just the one. From the power station or whatever, they'd knock off power for neighboring ranchers as well.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
As a Millennial I posted:Is the power company privately owned? If so, the freedom-loving militiamen should step aside and let them do as they will with their own power lines. It's still dangerous and you know it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
Subterfrugal posted:Longevity really is the Fed's superpower though. "Feel free to freeze your asses off patrolling Bundyland. We'll think kindly of you when we auction off the assets we seize from your estate. Evil Fluffy posted:The government can garnish your wages (or just seize assets) and there's gently caress all you can do about it. The government couldn't seize a handful of cows.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2016 22:29
|
|
"
|
I am not a book posted:I mean, I heard somewhere that these chucklefucks are actually FBI plants, which would explain why they aren't getting beatdown. They are not.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
Malleum posted:John Brown was hanged for treason despite not having the ability to start or maintain an armed insurrection. Ability has nothing to do with whether or not a traitor is a traitor. Treason is a bullshit charge, please don't defend it. edit: that is, yes I get why treason is prosecuted by the state, and I kind of understand the argument that they are participating in it. But of all the things they have done, you as a person should be least concerned about their disloyalty toward the United States of America. many johnnys fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Jan 18, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
Why did the hammonds go to jail again? Can they prove who exactly was holding matches when starting the arsons? I mean they don't have video footage or anything of the fires. I mean yeah he instructed his nephew to drop lit matches along the countryside until he ran out, and said "We are going to light up the whole country on fire", but that's just speech so why are they in prison? In light of Huratee, sounds like the Bundys have a case!!!!!!!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
I saw the argument about the FBI piling up little things for each individual militant instead of throwing the book at them for their little armed uprising, and thought "well how does that apply to the hammond case that ostensibly kicked this thing off from the start"? I overlooked that the Hammonds straight-up admitted to the fires (I had a brainfart and assumed they'd deny)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
size1one posted:Class C felonies are up to 5 years in prison and up to $125,000 fine. Doesn't apply to bundy
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Non-compliance means death or bodily injury! Remember: cops are your friends. Armed and dangerous man, who repeatedly says he's willing to kill police trying to arrest him and they'll never take him alive, who attacks them with his vehicle, then after a lengthy chase getting out and refusing to comply, and then reaching into his coat for his gun, is practically the definition of a good shoot. theflyingorc posted:Tarp man!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Nah. I fundamentally believe that cops should be able to shoot unless they have been fired upon. Even then, I'd prefer non lethal methods be at least attempted. I'm pretty sure the tarped gunman also knew the risks, at the moment he tried to pull out his weapon to make good on his repeated threats to shoot police officers.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
stay free tarp ghost
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Thread kinda exploded overnight, what happened? Cliven is trying to take the reins and finish what his son started townspeople came together to protest the outsiders occupying their town (or from the militia's point of view, counterprotesting their "protest"). The outsiders vow to stick around as long as the townspeople do this. The locals did go home at the end of the day though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
Mr. Belding posted:But if those hundred guilty men each commit crimes that damage 100 other innocent men then we perhaps sacrifice 1000 lines when only one could have been lost otherwise, and so your cliche crumbled under the weight of math, logic, and 4 seconds of relatively disinterested scrutiny. 100 times 100 is not 1000 math genius
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 22:33 |
|
|
Booourns posted:I know it's the middle of the
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2016 21:29
|
|