Switch Theme:

BLM vs ranching family  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






What happens if your car is towed and impounded because you have racked up thousands of dollars of unpaid parking tickets?


Driving since I was 17. I'm 43 now and some change (+ months). I have not received any parking tickets. I do pay my speeding ticket being my last one was '98 I do know though that there be a Warrent for your arrest issued after so many unpaid tickets. Our Smaj was blindsided on that one for wife driving his car downtown all the time.

How does this relate to a Court Order?
A Summon to appear before Court can have date change is legit enough one to two weeks in advance notice
A Court Order though cannot be adjusted though being its a "Order" and as such one is to stay within the guide lines of a "Order"

Since your going with unpaid Fee's Ouze. A Lien on his ranch is way more effective then what BLM tried to do.

Its like Bundy is pure anti everything with his stance and protest. While BLM is like the "Golden Child" that did no wrong.

Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog
Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.

Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha


 
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

 Jihadin wrote:
Driving since I was 17. I'm 43 now and some change (+ months). I have not received any parking tickets. I do pay my speeding ticket being my last one was '98 I do know though that there be a Warrent for your arrest issued after so many unpaid tickets. Our Smaj was blindsided on that one for wife driving his car downtown all the time.


You're ducking the question. Are you familiar with the reality that in, I daresay, every jurisdiction in this country, that when you car is seized and impounded due to unpaid fines/tickets, that if you don't pay your fines in a certain window, that it is sold at auction? That "to seize and impound" in the legal sense means the property will be sold if the balance is not satisfied?

 Jihadin wrote:
How does this relate to a Court Order?
A Summon to appear before Court can have date change is legit enough one to two weeks in advance notice


I'm not very good at math, but the court order I've read seems to have given him 45 days to rectify the situation and was 9 months before the roundup started.

My understanding is there is an additional court order, but this one is sufficient for the debate.

 Jihadin wrote:
Its like Bundy is pure anti everything with his stance and protest. While BLM is like the "Golden Child" that did no wrong.


You're creating an irrelevant fallacy. The facts are that Mr. Bundy has not paid his fines, citing that he does not believe the government has a right to exist. The government has a lawful order to then seize his property. Good, evil - those don't come into play. When I say that he is a scofflaw, it is a indisputable fact (that he himself readily agrees to), not a moral judgement.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/04/19 21:51:00


 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

He rejects reality, and substitutes his own.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






So I take it D-USA that a Court Order can be expanded by BLM eh

You're creating an irrelevant fallacy. The facts are that Mr. Bundy has not paid his fines, citing that he does not believe the government has a right to exist. The government has a lawful order to then seize his property. Good, evil - those don't come into play. When I say that he is a scofflaw, it is a indisputable fact (that he himself readily agrees to), not a moral judgement.



Hold one. I'm talking Court Order and your talking him not paying his fines His fines are not covered in the Court Order that was issued. His cattle was covered in the Court Order to be impounded. You have to stay within the guide lines of the Court Order regardless what rules, regulations and laws of the Department says.


Court Order.

So you all agree the Executive branch can over reach the Guide Lines established in a Judicial Court Order. Wow. Awesome. A Judicial Court Order can be trampled upon. So happy your for that D-USA and Ouze.

Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog
Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.

Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

The court has directed since the original order that they can be impounded and disposed.

Their regulations make it clear that they can be impounded and disposed.

Legal precedent makes it clear that disposal follows impoundment.

You have done jack to back up your claim other than "I don't think they should be able to even though I have zero legal basis for that opinion".

So excuse me for choosing legal facts, precedents, and regulatory guidelines over the non-fact based opinion from the guy supporting the criminal who has not provided any real evidence to back his argument.

Your head is so far up your own delusion that you should really come up for air sometime before there is permanent damage.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Where in the Court Order it says "Sell" or "Dispose" of. I can read to D-USA and dealt with Court Orders. It did not give guide lines to sell or dispose of cattle. Department rules, regulations and laws does not trump a Court Order.

Now if your done attacking me and my "world" show me on the Court Order where it specifies that. So far it specifies "Impound".

Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog
Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.

Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

It says that. I even posted where it said that. The very first court order, the one that started it all and has been upheld for two decades, states that they are to impound and dispose.

Your entire delusion hinges in the fact that in your mind impound='hold indefinitely until a court says something else' without providing any legal or regulatory basis for that opinion.

   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




 d-usa wrote:
It says that. I even posted where it said that. The very first court order, the one that started it all and has been upheld for two decades, states that they are to impound and dispose.

Your entire delusion hinges in the fact that in your mind impound='hold indefinitely until a court says something else' without providing any legal or regulatory basis for that opinion.



They may have been told to sell them, but the method was illegal according to federal standards.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






You posted a 1998 Court Order. 15 years old

You have a habit of posting very old info

Like your "Tibet" post


Find me a current up to date Court Order.

August 2013


August 2013: A court order says Bundy has 45 days to remove his cattle from federal land.

October 2013: A federal district judge court tells Bundy not to “physically interfere with any seizure or impoundment operation.”

March 15, 2014: After nearly 20 years, the Bureau of Land Management sends Bundy a letter informing him that they plan to impound his "trespass cattle," which have been roaming on 90 miles of federal land. BLM averages four livestock impoundments a year, usually involving a few dozen animals.

March 27, 2014: The BLM has closed off 322,000 acres of public land, and is preparing to collect Bundy's cattle. Bundy files a notice with the county sheriff department, titled “Range War Emergency Notice and Demand for Protection." Bundy also says he has a virtual army of supporters from all over the country ready to protect him. He also has Gardner. “I think Cliven is taking a stand not only for family ranchers, but also for every freedom-loving American, for everyone," Gardner said. "I’ve been trying to resolve these same types of issues since 1984. Perhaps it’s difficult for the average American to understand, but protecting the individual was a underlying factor of our government. ... My support is that I am determined to stand by the Bundy family in any fashion it takes regardless of the threat of life or limb."



You're after August 2013 Court Order. If you want to stick with a 1998 Court Order then stick with it.


Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog
Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.

Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

They can try to sell them, they can put a bullet in their heads, they can mount 900 heads in their lobby for their "we sure showed them ranchers" after party.

None of that violates the court order, which is the argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Jihadin wrote:
You posted a 1998 Court Order. 15 years old

You have a habit of posting very old info

Like your "Tibet" post


Find me a current up to date Court Order.

August 2013


August 2013: A court order says Bundy has 45 days to remove his cattle from federal land.

October 2013: A federal district judge court tells Bundy not to “physically interfere with any seizure or impoundment operation.”

March 15, 2014: After nearly 20 years, the Bureau of Land Management sends Bundy a letter informing him that they plan to impound his "trespass cattle," which have been roaming on 90 miles of federal land. BLM averages four livestock impoundments a year, usually involving a few dozen animals.

March 27, 2014: The BLM has closed off 322,000 acres of public land, and is preparing to collect Bundy's cattle. Bundy files a notice with the county sheriff department, titled “Range War Emergency Notice and Demand for Protection." Bundy also says he has a virtual army of supporters from all over the country ready to protect him. He also has Gardner. “I think Cliven is taking a stand not only for family ranchers, but also for every freedom-loving American, for everyone," Gardner said. "I’ve been trying to resolve these same types of issues since 1984. Perhaps it’s difficult for the average American to understand, but protecting the individual was a underlying factor of our government. ... My support is that I am determined to stand by the Bundy family in any fashion it takes regardless of the threat of life or limb."



You're after August 2013 Court Order. If you want to stick with a 1998 Court Order then stick with it.



It's like talking to a 6 year old.

The old original court order matters, because every single court order since then goes back to it. Bundy has spend the last 20 years going "bitch bitch they can't enforce that order" and every court since then ruled that the BLM can enforce the order.

There is no "pick and chose which order you want to go with", there is no "old order or new order", there is only the original order to impound and dispose and all the orders since then which are all orders to uphold and enforce the original court order.

The new order doesn't change the old order, the new order enforces the old order.

You have yet to produce a single piece of evidence in your favor that impound =/= dispose. Considering they local, state, and federal government impound and dispose crap every single day you shouldn't have any problems finding court cases showing that they are all acting illegally.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/19 22:47:10


 
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

 Jihadin wrote:
You posted a 1998 Court Order. 15 years old

You have a habit of posting very old info

Like your "Tibet" post


Find me a current up to date Court Order.

August 2013



I already posted it earlier in this thread. Here it is again. Case 2:12-cv-00804-LDG-GWF Document 35 Filed 07/09/13

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States is entitled to protect the New
Trespass Lands against this trespass, and all future trespasses by Bundy.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Bundy shall remove his livestock from the New
Trespass Lands within 45 days of the date hereof, and that the United States is entitled to
seize and remove to impound any of Bundy’s cattle that remain in trespass after 45 days of
the date hereof.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States is entitled to seize and remove to
impound any of Bundy’s cattle for any future trespasses, provided the United States has
provided notice to Bundy under the governing regulations of the United States Department
of the Interior.


As the first page says of it, it's re-iterating that his appeals are done and that the original order from 1998 stands.

The "seize and impound" means they they are to take his property, which is now property of the US government, and dispose of it as they wish. This is what seize and impound means in this context, just as cars are sold every day all around the country at auction.




This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/04/19 22:53:55


 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

 Jihadin wrote:
So most of you all agree that a Executive Branch department can go beyond a Judicial Court Order. So one's own Rules, Regulation and Laws of the Executive Branch trumps the guide lines of a Court Order.


Somehow it doesn't shock me to find more people who don't know how law enforcement works. The police impound millions of dollars in items every year. Sitting on them is a waste of tax payer money so they are put up for sale. The original owner has until the sale is finalized (30-45 days depending) to claim their property. If it is not claimed the sale goes through.

The court has nothing to do with the sale beyond granting permission to impound.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/20 00:47:48


   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






Relapse wrote:

As far as Bundy goes, I said from the first he was wrong, but I despised the way the BLM screwed the whole thing up. Have you even been reading anything I wrote, or were you so jazzed on your slaughter everyone down there line that you totaly overlooked that?


The only thing the BLM screwed up was not going in with more force and fully enforcing the court order.

You continue to make excuses and justifications for Bundy and all the horrible violent criminals down there. This is an open and shut case. The cattle should not be illegally trespassing on public land, Bundy should pay all his back fees and have his property seized to cover his debts. Done. That was not enforced because of violent, armed, illegal mobs and the cattle are still illegally trespassing and Bundy is still not paying fees.

The people down there deserve every bit of 'badness' which happens to them. If they didn't want it, then they shouldn't support a violent criminal and stop being involved in the racist and dangerous county supremacy movement.

My Models: Ork Army: Waaagh 'Az-ard - Chibi Dungeon RPG Models! - My Workblog!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
RULE OF COOL: When converting models, there is only one rule: "The better your model looks, the less people will complain about it."
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
MODELING FOR ADVANTAGE TEST: rigeld2: "Easy test - are you willing to play the model as a stock one? No? MFA." 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

Relapse wrote:
 dogma wrote:
Relapse wrote:

Not really, looking back at your comments.


Which comments?


The ones you just made trying in a round about way to legitimize OWS.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Federal regulations on the shipping and sale of cattle. BLM broke the law here:

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2012/12/pdf/traceability_final_rule.pdf


Finally getting an opportunity to read through this.

What specifically is your argument that they broke the law so that I know what to look for?
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






San Jose, CA

I shouldn't have to remind you all, but you shouldn't be directing negativity at other users. Behave, or else I may dispose of your ability to post here.

Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? 
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

Relapse wrote:

The ones you just made trying in a round about way to legitimize OWS.


Arguing that the OWS protests are not comparable to the Bundy protests does not in any way imply that the OWS protests were legitimate.

As I said before, that is your invention.

 Seaward wrote:

This seems to imply you believe OWS knew what they were protesting against.


Of course they did. They were protesting wealth inequality and the government policies which provide for its existence.

Relapse wrote:

As well as saying rape and murder should be ignored when comparing the two groups of protestors.


Crimes committed by protesters do not impact the legitimacy of what they are protesting. I consider a protest against wealth inequality to be a significantly more legitimate cause than a protest against a Federal agency enforcing a court ruling.

Relapse wrote:

Federal regulations on the shipping and sale of cattle. BLM broke the law here:

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2012/12/pdf/traceability_final_rule.pdf


That isn't a law, it is a Department of Agriculture regulation. The BLM is part of the Department of the Interior, so it isn't relevant.

Laws and regulations are different things.

This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2014/04/20 01:38:21


Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

 dogma wrote:
Relapse wrote:

Federal regulations on the shipping and sale of cattle. BLM broke the law here:

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2012/12/pdf/traceability_final_rule.pdf


That isn't a law, it is a Department of Agriculture regulation. The BLM is part of the Department of the Interior, so it isn't relevant.

Laws and regulations are different things.


Well, regulations do govern the interstate movement of cattle so there is some merrit there. I did post the Department of Interior regulations on how to impound and sell cattle, so I've claimed regulations as well.

However, reading through the DOA regulations, and the relevant Nevada and Utah regulations (I think we talked about Utah in particular) doesn't lead me to believe that any regulations were violated. I'll have to wait on Relapse to tell me which guidelines he believes were violated to know for certain though.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/20 01:43:30


 
   
Made in us
Imperial Admiral




nkelsch wrote:
OWS were legally protesting, non-violently without being armed, and when the courts determined they were trespassing and ordered them dispersed, they were dispersed. The difference is the BLM protestors are not peaceful, they are violent, armed, and trespassing and refusing to obey the law and let the courts implement the end result.

Well, no, the OWS were not legally protesting. That's why the police broke them up in cities throughout the country eventually. They also certainly were not peaceful, if the myriad police reports related to OWS activity in nearly every city they operated in are to be believed.

And if they couldn't afford guns, well...color me not shocked.

But it is illegal to transport guns across state lines for illegal purposes... Armed militias are illegal purposes.

No, I don't believe they are.

And just because you can carry doesn't mean you are not restricted in what you can legally do with said guns. An armed illegal militia breaking the law and assaulting federal agents is not a legal use covered by any carry permit I have ever seen.

Have you seen a lot of carry permits? I'm skeptical. And I haven't heard of any federal agents being shot yet, so I'm not sure what you're basing your assertions on.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/20 02:00:04


 
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

 d-usa wrote:

Well, regulations do govern the interstate movement of cattle so there is some merrit there. I did post the Department of Interior regulations on how to impound and sell cattle, so I've claimed regulations as well.


Right, but Department of Agriculture regulations do not apply to the BLM because the BLM is not a part of the Department of Agriculture.

Acting contrary to the regulations of another Executive department is not illegal, or even wrong. It happens all the time.

Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States is entitled to protect the New
Trespass Lands against this trespass, and all future trespasses by Bundy.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Bundy shall remove his livestock from the New
Trespass Lands within 45 days of the date hereof, and that the United States is entitled to
seize and remove to impound any of Bundy’s cattle that remain in trespass after 45 days of
the date hereof.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States is entitled to seize and remove to
impound any of Bundy’s cattle for any future trespasses, provided the United States has
provided notice to Bundy under the governing regulations of the United States Department
of the Interior


Impound. Just IMPOUND
One word IMPOUND
there is no IAW
In Accordance With Rules, Regulations, and/or Laws of "whatever BLM has on the books" to further the issue.

Those three words right there opens up additional avenues to resolve an issue. As it stands the Court Orders specify IMPOUND

Government documentation has to specify EVERYTHING to ensure the Law, Rules, and/or Regulations, Ordinance and Torts to, is on the government side. Its why you do not go outside the guide lines of a issue Court Order unless SPECIFIED with a "IAW" clausewhateverfitstoensureotheravenuestoresolve to make it "Idiot Proof". Right now the Court Order gives Bundy a loophole and puts BLM on the hook.

Ouze if this was the '98 then the there be a re-issue date in the first paragrapth or on page there should be a set of "numbers" running across the top and bottom. Its a verification date and page sequence number.

Though I believe we're looking at a re-issue date in first para.

Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog
Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.

Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

 Seaward wrote:
nkelsch wrote:
OWS were legally protesting, non-violently without being armed, and when the courts determined they were trespassing and ordered them dispersed, they were dispersed. The difference is the BLM protestors are not peaceful, they are violent, armed, and trespassing and refusing to obey the law and let the courts implement the end result.

Well, no, the OWS were not legally protesting. That's why the police broke them up in cities throughout the country eventually. They also certainly were not peaceful, if the myriad police reports related to OWS activity in nearly every city they operated in are to be believed.


We had our own branch of OWS here in Oklahoma City.

They had permits for use of the park they stayed in for months, the police made frequent rounds there (more for the protection of the protesters than preventing them from causing problems), the protesters let the police know what their plans were for the day ("hey, we are protesting in front of the Governors mansion today") and the police blocked the street for them to march and closed down a lane of traffic so that they could protest better. When the city refused to renew the permit for night-time use the Occupy OKC folks filed suit to try to stay in the park. The Chief of Police said that nobody will be rounded up even though there is no permit until the court makes a decision. A couple days later the court said that they can't stay without a permit so the protesters packed up and left.

Oklahoma, where even your protesting hippies are conservative
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

 Jihadin wrote:
IImpound. Just IMPOUND
One word IMPOUND



It wasn't one word. It was "seize and impound". It's been explained numerous time that those words in this context do not mean "seize and store indefinitely"; they mean to seize and sell at auction. We can keep repeating this indefinitely and it looks like we will but at this point you really should show at least some evidence to support your argument.

 Jihadin wrote:
Ouze if this was the '98 then the there be a re-issue date in the first paragrapth or on page there should be a set of "numbers" running across the top and bottom. Its a verification date and page sequence number.

Though I believe we're looking at a re-issue date in first para.


Did you read the order? It's 5 pages. That's not a snotty question, for some reason my earlier link isn't showing up in orange. It is now, I don't know what the difference is.

Anyway on the first page, second paragraph, it lays out that it's reiterating then 1998 litigation and orders.




 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

 dogma wrote:
 d-usa wrote:

Well, regulations do govern the interstate movement of cattle so there is some merrit there. I did post the Department of Interior regulations on how to impound and sell cattle, so I've claimed regulations as well.


Right, but Department of Agriculture regulations do not apply to the BLM because the BLM is not a part of the Department of Agriculture.

Acting contrary to the regulations of another Executive department is not illegal, or even wrong. It happens all the time.


But I do think that some federal departments have to follow regulations of other federal departments. I work for the Department of Veterans Affairs, but our pharmacy still has to follow the rules set forth by the FDA and our providers still have to get Federal provider numbers in order to practice. I don't know if the VA can purchase and ship guns across state lines without following the rules for firearms set forth by other federal agencies (keep your ATF jokes to yourself folks ). All Federal Agencies have to follow labor laws set forth by one specific agency, and it would be illegal for them not to do so. I'm not certain just how much influence one agency has on another, but I do think there is some overlap there. I most certainly could be wrong.

I do know that no state agency can pass any sort of law (well, they can pass what they want but it cannot be enforced) telling a federal agency how to do their job.
   
Made in us
Imperial Admiral




 d-usa wrote:
We had our own branch of OWS here in Oklahoma City.

They had permits for use of the park they stayed in for months, the police made frequent rounds there (more for the protection of the protesters than preventing them from causing problems), the protesters let the police know what their plans were for the day ("hey, we are protesting in front of the Governors mansion today") and the police blocked the street for them to march and closed down a lane of traffic so that they could protest better. When the city refused to renew the permit for night-time use the Occupy OKC folks filed suit to try to stay in the park. The Chief of Police said that nobody will be rounded up even though there is no permit until the court makes a decision. A couple days later the court said that they can't stay without a permit so the protesters packed up and left.

Oklahoma, where even your protesting hippies are conservative

You sure that wasn't a Tea Party rally? That sounds like a Tea Party rally.
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

 d-usa wrote:
I don't know if the VA can purchase and ship guns across state lines without following the rules for firearms set forth by other federal agencies


Is there less, or more paperwork when transferring to a different state vs selling to a Mexican drug cartel?

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

 Seaward wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
We had our own branch of OWS here in Oklahoma City.

They had permits for use of the park they stayed in for months, the police made frequent rounds there (more for the protection of the protesters than preventing them from causing problems), the protesters let the police know what their plans were for the day ("hey, we are protesting in front of the Governors mansion today") and the police blocked the street for them to march and closed down a lane of traffic so that they could protest better. When the city refused to renew the permit for night-time use the Occupy OKC folks filed suit to try to stay in the park. The Chief of Police said that nobody will be rounded up even though there is no permit until the court makes a decision. A couple days later the court said that they can't stay without a permit so the protesters packed up and left.

Oklahoma, where even your protesting hippies are conservative

You sure that wasn't a Tea Party rally? That sounds like a Tea Party rally.


Not enough guns.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Ouze wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
I don't know if the VA can purchase and ship guns across state lines without following the rules for firearms set forth by other federal agencies


Is there less, or more paperwork when transferring to a different state vs selling to a Mexican drug cartel?


What did I say about ATF jokes

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/20 02:21:56


 
   
Made in us
Hangin' with Gork & Mork






 Seaward wrote:
You sure that wasn't a Tea Party rally? That sounds like a Tea Party rally.


Unless they were conflating Jesus and America while getting skinheads to nod in approval it wasn't a Tea Party rally.

Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
 
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

 d-usa wrote:

But I do think that some federal departments have to follow regulations of other federal departments.


They do so as a matter of courtesy, or court ruling. And I don't believe there is a court ruling which requires the BLM to abide DOA regulations.

Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

 dogma wrote:
 d-usa wrote:

But I do think that some federal departments have to follow regulations of other federal departments.


They do so as a matter of courtesy, or court ruling. And I don't believe there is a court ruling which requires the BLM to abide DOA regulations.


Interesting, I just always figured it the other way around.

Got any actual examples for that?
   
Made in us
Imperial Admiral




 Ahtman wrote:
Unless they were conflating Jesus and America while getting skinheads to nod in approval it wasn't a Tea Party rally.

I'm surprised the rampant infiltration of the Tea Party by skinheads hasn't been reported on more.
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: