Oregon protest leader Ammon Bundy is arrested, says source

a reply to: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Xcathdra
I get it that people are pissed at the federal government and I am one of them. I just think we have not exhausted all legal means to fix the problem. The silver bullet is for people to vote.

In the words of the comedian Gabriel Iglesias

Agree!!

Fluffy!

To add, I just would damn well be sure that the person who gets my vote understands The Constitution and not some extremist, mythological version of it.

a reply to: desert

It's not JUST voting, but it is getting out and taking a stand for something, a specific something.

When people see people come out for just overall anarchy, those people lose credibility.

I too agree there are many things which need to be "fixed", but traveling from Nevada, Arizona and calling all militia to show up from where ever, for a non-specific fight, just for the sake of a fight against the fed, isn't helping.

We need to pick an issue, stick with the specific issue...make a big deal out of it even, if need be, and work to a resolution of those issues.

When the issues become too many to count...THEN, and only then, will the 'people' begin to see the abuses which are taking place. The shotgun approach just doesn't work for mainstream broad support. The 'people' see this as just extremism.

My .02

a reply to: Xcathdra
Same excuses administrations have used to justify torture. "Something good might come of it" "It's for the children."
You know as well as I do that this isn't the case so why keep pretending? Use of force is a powerful ego booster, the more people they can put in jail, the more powerful they feel and the more revenue they generate.
Do you know how many times the Nazi excuse is offered up: "I don't like this law either but I'm just following orders."?
It didn't hold water at Nuremberg but somehow, due to lack of education, it is seen as a perfectly reasonable excuse.
If the founders of this country had your attitude we'd still be bowing to the Queen.

Know why I don't trust any of the LEOs? Because if they were good people they would take stands against the bad ones. Until that happens---huh, I ain't holdin' my breath. If they can't police themselves....what good are they?

a reply to: Xcathdra
May I point out to you that about 40 states have now "ignored federal law'" on the issue of marijuana. Haven't seen SWAT, National Guard and military called out to put down those rebellions.
May I point out to you that numerous cities have declared themselves "sanctuary cities" in direct violation of federal immigration laws? Don't see the SWAT teams and National Guard being called out.
May I point out to you that at least two, possibly more recent presidents have ordered the violation of federal firearms laws in what has been called Fast and Furious? Nobody SWATted the DOJ for that bit of illegal activity.

As for voting being the "silver bullet'----now that did make me chuckle.
www.foxnews.com...

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

God bless you, Flying! Exactly. Well put.

Yes, voting is necessary but not sufficient. Organizing around an issue is. Nonviolently.

I remember a quote I saw somewhere years ago...
There's a moment when they believe we want it more, stronger, and longer than they want to keep it from us. That's the moment we win.

Decades ago people did organize and speak up and got results. True grassroots organizations started to promote legislative change. Two organizations might even go to court and present the sides of their members.

I think that around 1980, people became convinced that all they had to do was elect someone, and that someone would always act on their behalf. Complacency. No one would have to resort to organizing, or, God forbid, join a fellow citizen in protest. And astroturf organization sprang up, to make sure the people's voice was directed away from organizing for change. Misdirection.

Whatever change has happened in America for the good of the people has happened because of a long sustained movement or struggle...outside of politics. Violence and anarchy do not win in the end. Because of complacency and misdirection over the years, the dirt piled over us has gotten higher, so the digging out will take more of the right effort.

And we the people have to understand that taking a stand united, outside of politics, to push our politicians, makes our voting count. We can count votes, but to make our votes count, we need to do as you so eloquently put it.

a reply to: diggindirt

No 40 states have not -

If you spent more time educating yourself, say on the CSA, and less time seeing conspiracies in everything you would have noticed the AG has the authority to add AND remove substances / change their classifications by rule in addition to something called prosecutorial discretion. Not to mention in Dec 2014 the Obama administration, along with Congress, ended the federal ban on marijuana (Source). The decriminalization law was part of a 1.1 trillion dollar spending bill he signed in Dec of 2014.

Controlled Substances Act (CSA)

PART B - AUTHORITY TO CONTROL; STANDARDS AND SCHEDULES
§ 811. Authority and criteria for classification of substances.

....... the Attorney General may by rule -

(1) add to such a schedule or transfer between such schedules any drug or other substance if he -
(A) finds that such drug or other substance has a potential for abuse, and
(B) makes with respect to such drug or other substance the findings prescribed by subsection (b) of section 812 of this title for the schedule in which such drug is to be placed; or
(2) remove any drug or other substance from the schedules if he finds that the drug or other substance does not meet the requirements for inclusion in any schedule.

23 states have laws allowing medical marijuana.

Congress supported the action as they see the issue as a state's right verse federal overreach. They also noted politicians should not be meddling in an area that is between a patient and their doctor. If you live in a state whose laws allow for marijuana use your covered. If you live in a state that doesn't you are in violation of the law. Full faith and credit clause does not apply.

* - President Signs Federal Spending Bill Protecting State Sanctioned Medical Marijuana Programs
* - Omnibus spending bill Dec 2014 **PDF**

If you want to lecture me please learn what you are talking about in addition to all relevant laws instead of cherry-picking your argument by basing it on what you agree with while ignoring the parts you don't like (The nazis used to do that as well and their is a saying about throwing rocks from inside your glass house - ironic).

What else can I educate you on?

Should we discuss the 7th amendment and how its never been applied to the states? Or maybe the 4th amendment, which doesn't apply to the individual? How about admiralty law and the sovereign citizen movement to try and use it for something it never applied to? Maybe we can discuss the latest on the thread topic and try to figure out why the protest, and everything its based on, went down like the titanic?

In order to make a compelling argument you may want to learn as much as you can and not just the parts you like/agree with. By the way some of these militia groups can be directly compared to the Nazi party and its rise to power so again, learn history before trying to invoke an example that applies to your side as well.

As to why you don't like law enforcement.. I would guess its because they understand the law better than you do and you can't stand that it. Or maybe because you don't understand how our government works and based on that ignorance you blame the police because you don't know any better?

Tell me... aside from bitching and yelling at the sky because it rains what have you done to advance your position? Vote? write your congressman / senator? organize with like minded people?

a reply to: Xcathdra
I don't yell or bitch at the sky. Doesn't do any good.
TY for your questions. I'll do my best to satisfy your curiosity.

I've been active on these issues and many others since I was a teenager in the '60s. But I didn't depend solely on the university to educate me. I've read on these issues since I was a teenager. Reading The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich when I was thirteen had a big impact on me. To realize that people could treat other humans like livestock---and it was real, not a horror novel. And that such evil could overcome a society in so little time.
You don't know me. I don't know you beyond what you've presented here on these boards--that you are law enforcement.
My heritage is that of people who fight for their rights. From the ancestors who fought the British in both revolutions, to the Rebels who fought the Feds during the War of Northern Aggression, then the great-grandmother that spent the majority of her life trying to gain the right of the vote for women. Being threatened with arrest and harassed by law enforcement for standing outside a courthouse with signs. Her mother had been threatened with arrest for teaching her slaves to read---a violation of the law---in an effort to prepare them for their freedom. It was reported that she looked that sheriff in the eye and told him to take her away in chains if he would, but she would continue to teach those people because they deserve to know liberty. She had read the writings of the founders. She knew that an uneducated society could not proper.
It was only natural that when the Civil Rights movement began, our family would be there standing for the rights of others, knowing the joys of liberty belong to everyone who wants to build this society.

You can show me a bill that claims to legalize marijuana but it is a smoke-screen. I can show you this article that says plainly that marijuana is still a prohibited substance in federal law. Who is correct?
www.safeaccessnow.org...

Despite medical cannabis laws in 40 states, cannabis is still illegal under federal law. The federal government regulates drugs through the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) (21 U.S.C. § 811), which does not recognize the difference between medical and recreational use of cannabis. These laws are generally applied only against persons who possess, cultivate, or distribute large quantities of cannabis. Under federal law, cannabis is treated like every other controlled substance, such as coc aine and heroin. The federal government places every controlled substance in a schedule, in principle according to its relative potential for abuse and medicinal value. Under the CSA, cannabis is classified as a Schedule I drug, which means that the federal government views cannabis as highly addictive and having no medical value. Doctors may not "prescribe" cannabis for medical use under federal law, though they can "recommend" its use under the First Amendment. Federal cannabis laws are very serious, and punishment for people found guilty is frequently very steep. Federal law still considers cannabis a dangerous illegal drug with no acceptable medicinal value. In several federal cases, judges have ruled that medical issues cannot be used as a defense, though defense attorneys should attempt to raise the issue whenever possible during trial. Federal law applies throughout Washington D.C. and the United States, not just on federal property.

This is the law that would do at least a part of what you claim has already happened.

Ending the War:
CARERS Act of 2015
The Compassionate Access, Research Expansion, and Respect States Act (CARERS) of 2015 is the most comprehensive piece of federal medical marijuana legislation ever introduced in the U.S. Congress. The bipartisan act which is sponsored in the Senate by Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and, in the House of Representatives, by Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) and Rep. Don Young (R-AK) combined a handful of medical cannabis bills that had been introduced over the last decade. This important bill would remedy the state-federal conflict over medical marijuana law, with far-reaching impacts, including: Allowing state programs to continue without federal interference Moving marijuana out of the Schedule I list Removing CBD from the scheduling Creating access to banking services for legal marijuana businesses Ending the DEA-Imposed NIDA monopoly that blocks research Allowing Veterans Affairs doctors to write recommendations in states that have a medical marijuana program. Congress has until December 31, 2016 to pass the CARERS Act.

Yes, I do write my Congress critters. I do more than that, I make sure to talk with them face to face. (Except for Moneybags Mitch---he just gets email.) Rand Paul, one of the sponsors of the bill is my Senator. I've spoken extensively with him on this matter, long before he was Senator, when he was in our area at least a year before his campaign began. I respect his efforts and those of his father to bring about change in the hemp and marijuana issue.

I've worked at the state level with legislators since 1981 on hemp and marijuana legalization. I ran for Lt. Governor in a statewide race on a third party ticket. Traveled the Commonwealth for a year listening to people, finding out how they felt about what was transpiring in our state and how government was supposed to interact with the people. I can honestly say it was one of the most educational years of my life. I got to mix and mingle and pick the brains of people far smarter and wiser than myself. I sat on stages with everyone from the Governor to Willie Nelson who came to do a benefit for our campaign. We didn't win our election but we got the most votes a third party ticket has ever gotten in the Commonwealth. We were honored to receive those votes.
I've never used force against anyone except to defend myself. I've never been arrested. I've done my best to serve my community in whatever way I am able.
In the late '80s I began reading law with one of the Commonwealth's most distinguished attorneys. Individually, for two years, three hours a day, three days a week.
Not to become a lawyer, but to understand the law, the basis of the law and how we use it to make a better society. He loved the law, had an absolute passion for it,as did my running mate in the Governor's race. I view the as a tool and the Constitution as the blueprint by which all tools must be built. I have a passion for the basis of the law, the Constitution. I was taught that if I wanted to understand the intentions of the Framers, I needed to read their writings, not someone's opinion of their writings---original sources!
I have said repeatedly that the methods chosen by the Oregon protesters aren'tthe means I would have used. I said the same thing about the protesters in Ferguson. Such things have to be carefully vetted. But I've also maintained that they have legitimate issues.
Multi-level corruption in government which results in the over-reach of that government. Over-reach of government aided by the Black Robed Tribe has made me a violator of federal law on a daily basis. Because I refuse to buy a corporate product---I'm an outlaw. I'm in rebellion. Presently, there's only a fine.

a reply to: diggindirt
I fail to understand, based on your background, why you pick and choose laws you like while ignoring the ones you don't like. I don't understand how you can make a valid argument when you don't have all the facts. That observation is for both, marijuana and the thread topic on the standoff.

You come across as very distrustful of the government, attacking certain aspects of it (the militia issue included) while at the very same time demonstrating, by your arguments, that you don't have a complete understanding of the constitution or law.

I raise that issue because you are advocating certain positions while claiming the government is violating the constitution / laws. If you don't know the law / constitution(all aspects including the parts you don't like) how can you condemn government action for violating the law and constitution?

That seems to be the same issue with the militia in Oregon.

a reply to: Xcathdra
I think I'll rely on my two years of individually reading law (en.wikipedia.org...) with a distinguished law professor over a state cop's opinion.
I actually took the time to read the documents and the background of the documents in those years and the years since. It's a far different education than is provided by government-sponsored schools. That's why I stated above that I didn't simply rely on the university to provide an education in these matters.
When you have put in the those amounts of hours of actually reading law instead of taking what someone said about it in class, you can debate. Until then, you should just stick to citing people for seat belt violations and such.

nvm..

not worth it..

a reply to: Informer1958

A good interview if you missed it.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

A good interview if you missed it.