Featured Militiamen seize national park office in Oregon

Regarding the occupation of the federal building: Don't they realize they're just making it easier for people to support Obama's executive orders against guns? If it's truly "public land," then why are they refusing to allow people public access to it?

This is possibly the most un-thought-out action I've ever heard of. What exactly are they hoping to accomplish? What's the end goal?

 

Regarding the Hammonds: Can anyone educate me on the legality of sentencing someone to a specific time period; then, when the sentence is served, re-sentencing them to additional time? Yes, I understand that the first sentencing didn't meet the federal minimum requirement; but that's the fault of the courts *at that time.* Who decided, after the Hammonds were released, to bring it up again, take it to another judge, and subsequently have them locked up for further prison time?

There's just something hinky about the whole situation.

 

Yep, that's what I said too. They are now the poster children for him pushing the boundaries on his forthcoming executive order. And I have a sneaking suspicion that it will look a lot like what they just did in California. It will be in the interest of public safety and the safety of the individual and their families for the government to be able to seize their guns.

Although they may need a good Bundy motivated shoot-out to take place in order to do so.

 

Most definitely DISAGREE with the part I bolded and underlined. Once you use that as an excuse to take someone's freedom away, it's much, much easier to do it to others.

 

Again: something hinky. "It went to higher courts"; does that mean the prosecution appealed a case they won? Have you ever heard of someone appealing a case they won, in order to get stricter sentencing? Or did someone else get involved?

 

Got my answer. The prosecution appealed the verdict. http://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/e...convicted-arson-resentenced-five-years-prison

 

I wonder why Poncho is silent about this. Seems right down his alley.

 

He has spoken on it in the other thread.

 

Don, I'm saying that's the EXCUSE they can now use patterned after the law that recently passed in California.
http://www.baptistboard.com/threads...out-notice-to-owner-starting-january-1.97602/

 

Found it eventually.

Looks like someone combined the two threads into one. A disjointed mess.

 

18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384

 

Got a real iffy case, there.

Real iffy.

 

Then answer the question. Quit tap dancing around it.

 

Look it up yourself , genius.

 

The feds have gotten their pound of flesh. But they want more. Some really smart , caring governor or president should end this by pardoning the Hammonds or commuting their sentences. These men are not criminals.


http://www.tsln.com/news/17302049-113/story.html


Judge Hogan used his discretion under the Eighth Amendment to sentence Dwight (now 74) to three months in prison, followed by three years’ “supervised release.” Dwight’s son Steven (45), father of three, was sentenced to one year and one day in prison—also to be followed by three years’ “supervised release.” The men served their sentences starting in 2013.


The ranch is also paying $400,000 as part of a settlement agreement with BLM for the alleged costs of fighting fires for which BLM claims the Hammonds are responsible. If the Hammonds have to sell part of their ranch to make the payment, BLM managed (as part of the settlement agreement) to get first option to buy.

 

Well, haven't had time to catch up. Have the feds launched an assault to kill all those gun totin' american terrorists yet? Are they still holding hostages? Or have the people they killed even been buried yet?

We have to do something about these terrorist killers. A building is crying out in pain and asking for liberation. Let's do it. Call in the Marines!!!

 

Don't know. But they need to be killed. They've shot up the town, murdered and terrorized the residents. Time to show them just how powerful the federal government is.

 

Yep. Their pound of flesh wasn't enough. They want 5 pounds. It's ridiculously overbearing actions like this that give rise to groups like the one that have occupied the building.

It could be that what the BLM really wants is a chance to steal their ranch. By keeping them in prison, it will make it much harder for them to pay their $400,000 fine. If they don't pay, the BLM gets first chance at their land.