The Oregon standoff regarding federal land is calm for now. In recent years the feds have learned patience in these types of situations. The best strategy for the government is to wait it out and the occupiers will get tired, hungry, bored and start to miss their homes and families.
As much as I worry about federal power and individual rights, I suspect that what is really going on here is greed that is dressed up in fancy talk about the constitution, rights etc. This happens way too often and is a tactic used by both the left and right. "The fight itself stretches back to the passage of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, which confirmed the policy of federal retention of public lands." The conviction of the ranchers for arson seems valid to me as does the new sentence. Seems like in the heat of the moments, people forget about our bedrock principle of the rule of law. One of the components of this is that property changes hands through legal means. I suspect that many of these fed-haters still haven't gotten over the Civil War, the 13th Amendment and having to treat blacks like legal equals. I could be wrong on all this, what do you think?
I believe that you have it right. Dale C.
ReplyDelete(I don't know about the "select profile.")
Thanks, not sure what you are referring to with 'select profile.'
ReplyDeleteWhat does America's Civil War and the 13th Amendment have to do with real property ownership? Like it or not, the land in question belongs to the federal government. They get to call the shots on its usage. Not some wannabe anarchist on a quest for personal gain at the expense of the public. I believe the terrorism charge for the accused was an overreach by the court. Convicting the fire setters of reckless behavior would have been appropriate. Regarding the Bundy group IMO, they belong in jail on a charge of stupidity.
ReplyDeleteThe gut issue of the Civil War and 13th Amendment was slavery. People claimed that other humans could be property and that abolition or emancipation violated their property rights. The issues are property rights in both cases, and opposition tofederal law on property. Just different types of property. The arguments of opponents of federal law are similar. Agreed re your post.
Delete