I've been following the news off & on about the group that has taken over the building at the wildlife refuge. I don't know enough about ranching, grazing fees, land management, etc, to know the key points of either side. What I find most interesting is how the majority of the population in the Northwest condemn these occupiers yet endorse other forms of civil disobedience.

Just interested in hearing some other folks views.

Thanks
~JM~

The main difference between them and other civil disobedience actions is that they are "occupying" with arms and stating that they will answer force with force... not the same as unarmed protests...

The whole thing is another form of "Range war" that has been going on since the 1800's... just from a different group and point of view... I believe that quite a few of the protesters there are not there for the proposed cause but just to be able to wave their guns at the government and say "na na na na"... sometimes such advocates are more of a harm to us responsible gun owners than I'd care to associate with... all I see is a bunch of adolescent school yard children throwing a tantrum and waving sticks in the air...

To say they don't want a armed confrontation is down right idiocy... of course they do... they want to martyr themselves... they quote Ruby Ridge and Waco... but do they say anything about Wounded Knee?... of course not... cause it doesn't fit their agenda...

As far as I'm concerned... stupid is as stupid does.

Well that's my opinion... and I'll get yelled at for what some will call my "liberal" leanings... such as it is... I don't give a flying whatever any more... I'm too old and tired to care what folks think of me...

So there it is... fire away...

Don the Curmudgeon

in regards to this...

--
Of the Troops & For the Troops

If it has, I haven't seen it.. I've read a lot of Ruby Ridge and Waco references but nothing else...

But if Wounded Knee has been referenced... I'm glad to hear it...

And thanks, Rob for letting me know... could you send me a link to some of that?

I'd appreciate it..

Thanks,

Don

I don't know much about it but I say leave them alone, eventually they will get tired of it and go away. Its not like they occupied a building that was in use or are holding people.

I can understand a man digging his heels in and saying "No more". You ain't gonna win, but I get it. Choose that battle carefully including LOCATION. Any damn fool knows you will lose and lose big if you grab an armload of guns and try to make that stand on federally-controlled property.

As far as the guy who got shot on the traffic stop? Watch the video.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4727157766001/fbi-releases-video-of-fatal-shooting-of-oregon...

Over/Under reaction to a situation. Several hundred rioters and looters in an urban setting (pick one) and we don't want to offend them by sending in the police/National guard. But a few dozen dudes in cowboy hats with guns occupying an empty building in the winter and we send in the federal troops. Looking at the video, narrator says the gun was still in his pocket and it appears the victim has is turning his back when shot down. If this were a civilian shooting scenario on film the shooter would be in jail facing charges. He probably couldn't get his gun out of his pocket with no holster and heavy winter gloves on. Now if that 9 had been in a Simply Rugged holster he could have drawn and deserve shooting.

Being portrayed by media as a few sparks in the NW from a bunch of (pick your derogatory term).

On the other hand, those sparks are a lot like sparks in the powder magazine.

Anybody else get that "uneasy" feeling about this train in which we are all riding?

6

I have watched that video a few times & there are a few actions that seem strange to me.

When the white truck hits the snow bank an agent leaves the safety of cover & runs in front of the truck. That doesn't seem very smart.

When Finicum leaves the truck he clearly has his hands in the air & walks away from the cover of the truck. I would think that if he had intended to shoot, he would have had his weapon at the ready prior to exiting the truck.

There are some narrated versions of the video that make the claim that Finicum was not reaching for a weapon when his hands went down to his mid-section, but was in response to being shot twice. The quality of the video is not clear enough for me to determine if there is any validity to this claim.

Thanks
~JM~

The first thoughts I had was: they were told some days before, when ever it was they had the summit with the sheriff, blm, and fbi they could leave without being molested. They were doing just that. So, if ever I was in a similar situation, I now know I could not believe a word they said.