New Militia Invades Takeover to Keep the Peace

[dechatelet]

Originally Posted by Old Guard

If you are so sure why not take it to court?

The court is not the Constitution.

No need to make up an answer because we know the answer. You are wrong.

No, I am right.

Anyone who has studied the Constitution and the history of this country will know that the founders created a voluntary confederation of states with a very limited federal government. You libs constantly deny this.

What some liberal court says is of no interest to me.

Originally Posted by Old Guard

First, if this is even true, why do you keep stating this as if it is a meaningful point?

Because it is a meaningful point.

So far, no one has given a good reason why 80% of the land in Nevada should be owned by the federal government.

Originally Posted by Old Guard

Dude, I am from rural America. I served in the US Army. I think people are interested in knowledge and facts but when asked specific questions you deflect or offer overly broad answers like "The Constitution" without specifics to back it up. This to many people is a sign that a person knows that they are wrong and cannot admit it.

My answers are not overly broad.

They are directed at apparently ignorant people who know little about history in general (that is certainly true here on C-D), the history of Western Civilization, the history of the United States, and the context and content of our founding documents.

They are either ignorant, or they want to persuade others of things that they themselves know not to be true.

Either way, they are wrong.

Now, why don't YOU give me a good reason why 80% of the land in Nevada should be owned by the federal government?

See -- no one answers my questions, but I am the one who is supposedly being unresponsive.

Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest

I second all of Old Guard's questions to you, Mr. Dechalet.

Yeah, while that's a big surprise.

And now I'll also invite you to give me a good reason why 80% of the land in Nevada should be owned by the federal government.

It's more than a little disturbing that you seem to be inciting or at least encouraging a Civil War, first on behalf of faux ranchers & more recently your 'War on White People' rhetoric? C'mon man, haven't enough lives been sacrificed to Civil Wars?

It takes two sides to make a war.

When the government tramples over the rights of the citizens, we know what the Declaration of Independence recommends as a remedy to that, don't we?

It is obvious that this condemnation of citizens standing up for their rights is being done by people who simply don't care about their rights.

So don't expect me to take you seriously.

Originally Posted by jimj

I would say "evidently not" given the recent past/current government overreach in many areas of our lives. This could be fixed at the ballot box but hasn't been so far. Hopefully the changes will happen this time around and a civil conflict can be avoided. Eventually the "serfs" get tired of being dictated to and having their path out of serfdom cut off even more...

Exactly.

And the way that the "serfs" have been abused has been very clearly explained here -- particularly by the U.S. Congressman representing the Oregon county in question.

Of course, none of what he says is ever responded to by the liberals here.

Originally Posted by Old Guard

Talk, talk, talk. I am always amazed at how many of these freedom fighters live off the government teat.

B.S.

When I hear you complaining about the rioters in Ferguson, Baltimore and Oakland living on welfare, then I'll take you seriously.

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

Right...and who do you think would end up buying that land? Hedge funds and huge investment groups would buy it and lease it back to the same ranchers who now lease from the Government, but it would be at market rate, somewhere between 3 and 10 times what they pay now.

And the people in Nevada who spend their time enjoying BLM land, recreating; running their dogs, hunting, going out in 4WD vehicles, riding their horses would be paying admission to the new private owners, or the land would be fenced with no public access. THAT is not what the people of Nevada want, maybe you should look into that before you start telling us what 'should' happen to federal land.

Oh, please...your imagined scenarios are ridiculous.

Land in Nevada is not worth that much -- it is mostly desert.

And a few hundred thousand Nevadans don't need 80% of the land in Nevada for "recreating."

Originally Posted by Old Guard

These people would **** a brick when the Chinese and Russians bought this land.

Very poor logic, constructing a false dilemma in which the only two alternatives are foreigners buying the land or the government owning the land.

Originally Posted by jimj

Wow, so anyone who can see BOTH sides of the situation is a rabble-rousing rebel or living off the government teat? I guess that beats being one of the sheeple that follows the "masters" in Washington down the primrose path. I would say the vast majority of people, if asked, would be more in line with those that are seeing the government as overreaching,greedy,crooked and wholly self interested than those that think everything is just peachy and D.C. just wants to help everyone.

Well said.

[mjlo]

Closing another thread because of political discussion. I get that some of these issues are hard not to breach the subject. But when the topic goes exclusively to politics it gets too hard to manage. You are all welcome to have this discussion about constitutional rights, and dirty liberals and pious right wingers in the designated forums.