Taboo Topic: BLM Nevada: ...Was the 2nd Ammendment in Play?

[jshuberg]

There has been a very troubling trend over the last hundred years or so where the fedgov has presumed to expand their power without a necessary constitutional amendment to do so. Quite often the courts play along, but this doesn't make it either right or legal. The courts cannot, not even the Supreme Court, grant the fedgov additional powers. Only by a 3/4 vote of the several states can the fedgov be granted additional powers.

When the fedgov overreaches, it's up to both we the people, and those who specifically swore an oath to the constitution to refuse to comply with the overreach. Refusal is not only just, it's necessary for maintaining a free state.

[Deputyhiro]

There has been a very troubling trend over the last hundred years or so where the fedgov has presumed to expand their power without a necessary constitutional amendment to do so. Quite often the courts play along, but this doesn't make it either right or legal. The courts cannot, not even the Supreme Court, grant the fedgov additional powers. Only by a 3/4 vote of the several states can the fedgov be granted additional powers.

When the fedgov overreaches, it's up to both we the people, and those who specifically swore an oath to the constitution to refuse to comply with the overreach. Refusal is not only just, it's necessary for maintaining a free state.

Well put sir.

[Jackpine Savage]

I ran across this case that sheds a little light on how the BLM operates:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/15602-federal-judge-rules-for-property-rights-smacks-down-abusive-feds

Federal Judge Rules for Property Rights, Smacks Down Abusive Feds

"Judge Jones said he found that “the government and the agents of the government in that locale, sometime in the ’70s and ’80s, entered into a conspiracy, a literal, intentional conspiracy, to deprive the Hages of not only their permit grazing rights, for whatever reason, but also to deprive them of their vested property rights under the takings clause, and I find that that’s a sufficient basis to hold that there is irreparable harm if I don’t … restrain the government from continuing in that conduct.”

In fact, Judge Jones accused the federal bureaucrats of racketeering under the federal RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corruption Organizations) statute, and accused them as well of extortion, mail fraud, and fraud, in an effort “to kill the business of Mr. Hage.”

.........

"“Government's actions … shock the conscience of the Court"
The court found, "In the present case, the Government's actions over the past two decades shock the conscience of the Court." This finding, coupled with the court’s finding that agents of the BLM and the USFS engaged in a conspiracy to deprive the Hage family of their vested property rights, opens the door to potential lawsuits against the individual agents personally for their unconstitutional actions."

[Jackpine Savage]

http://washingtonexaminer.com/fight-federal-abuse-of-property-rights-by-making-the-government-obey-its-own-rules/article/2547278

Fight federal abuse of property rights by making the government obey its own rules

" Most ranchers don’t know that and federal agencies exploit their ignorance with harassment that runs them off the land. Actually, understanding vested rights is not too hard – they’re absolute rights not subject to cancellation – but proving up those rights by assembling your chain of title and other technicalities and then making the government protect them is very hard.

The agencies know they don’t own the water rights, so their lawyers fight viciously with misdirection to save their empire from the owners. Ranchers lose in court because they don’t know how to prove up their vested rights and they don’t get lawyers who know the precision required to plead a vested rights case. Very few lawyers know. "

[20mm]