Militia takes over Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters (2 Viewers)

[Denny Crane]

The law they were sentenced under is the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996.

barfo

Terrorism?

Just wow.

Overzealous, as I said.

The men aren't terrorists, they're ranchers.

 

[Denny Crane]

Like I said, if you only consider the constitution and none of the court cases since then, then you might be right.

barfo

I've already provided several court cases I'm sure you find wrong or unconstitutional. If the court makes bad rulings, civil disobedience is the only action that is left.

Courts ruled sodomy laws were legal. People did it anyway because the law matters less than the individual's natural rights. Doing so was civil disobedience.

When government is tyrannical, the people should resist. That's what this country has been about since the Declaration of Independence.

 

[barfo]

Terrorism?

Just wow.

Overzealous, as I said.

The men aren't terrorists, they're ranchers.

No one said they were terrorists.

It's just the name of the law.

barfo

 

[barfo]

I've already provided several court cases I'm sure you find wrong or unconstitutional. If the court makes bad rulings, civil disobedience is the only action that is left.

Courts ruled sodomy laws were legal. People did it anyway because the law matters less than the individual's natural rights. Doing so was civil disobedience.

When government is tyrannical, the people should resist. That's what this country has been about since the Declaration of Independence.

Sure. Unfortunately, the government owning land is not tyranny.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

No one said they were terrorists.

It's just the name of the law.

barfo

Like "emergency " stimulus bill?

I don't think so.

Your kind calls it ...

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/03/3735647/malheur-lake-oregon-militia-explainer/

the federal anti-terrorism law that prosecutors used to punish the fires includes mandatory minimum sentences of 5 years for fires that damage public property but cause no injury or death.

The federal judge that heard the case gave appropriate sentences for the act. The overzealous prosecutors didn't have to appeal.

 

[Denny Crane]

Sure. Unfortunately, the government owning land is not tyranny.

barfo

The feds not being good neighbors is tyranny.

Hundreds of ranchers showed up in support of these guys. If government was so great, nobody would have shown up.

 

[Denny Crane]

Oregon Farm Bureau loves government.

http://www.oregonfb.org/2015/10/07/...ng-steve-dwight-hammond-years-federal-prison/

Statement by Oregon Farm Bureau President Barry Bushue on sentencing of Steve and Dwight Hammond to five years in federal prison
October 7, 2015

SALEM, OREGON, October 7, 2015 – “Today two Oregon ranchers were sentenced to five years in federal prison under terrorism statutes for setting preventative fires on their own land. We are gravely disappointed at this outcome.

Elderly Harney County rancher Dwight Hammond and his son, Steven, a former OFB Board member and Harney County Farm Bureau president, have already served time in federal prison for their mistakes and paid their debt to society for the less-than-140 acres of BLM land that was accidentally impacted by the fires.

This is an example of gross government overreach, and the public should be outraged.

Today’s verdict is also hypocritical given BLM’s own harm to public and private grazing lands, which goes without consequence. It is unjust. OFB worked on this case quietly behind the scenes with BLM through the spring and summer. That diligent diplomatic effort was fruitless.

This prosecution will have a chilling effect across the West among ranchers, foresters, and others who rely on federal allotments and permits. It will harm the positive relationship many ranchers and organizations have worked to forge with the BLM, and undermine the cooperative spirit most ranchers have brought to the bureau in helping the health of the range.

Please join Farm Bureau and declare your support for Steve and Dwight Hammond. Join over 2,600 other citizens from across the country and show BLM that this extreme abuse of power will not go unnoticed and is shameful. Sign the petition at www.savethehammonds.com. This must never happen again.

OFB will continue to work to bring public and policymaker attention to this case.”

 

[oldfisherman]

I do not know enough about the agenda and situation of the militia to comment on their behavior. And to be honest, do not care enough to study them. However, this is what I do know about our public lands in OR & WA.

The process of managing our OR & WA public lands is broken, broken on both the federal and state levels. The process has been broken for many decades. We are now seeing some of the damage caused by years of mismanagement.

All of the decisions made by federal agencies concerning the ecosystem are made to satisfy political agendas, not to implement the best available science. The power to manage our federal public lands is held by those that control the funding, not by the biologists conducting the tests and studies.

The state public lands and ecosystem of Oregon and Washington are two of the worst managed states in our country. States such as Pennsylvania and West Virginia with far less public lands and far higher population densities have a much healthier ecosystems than Oregon and Washington. Why? OR & WA use faulty voodoo science models to manage the ecosystem with funding for projects again controlled by politics. Something is very wrong with how OR & WA manage our public lands.

State level managers that have run successful programs in other states have been hired into OR & WA agencies. The only way they survive in their jobs is if they completely give in to the system here, and give up trying to implement programs that have worked in other states. Many of them just give up after a couple of months and return to their old states.

And this does not even get into the damage to our OR & WA public lands caused by special interest groups filing lawsuits. Not only damage they are causing that results in an imbalance to the environment, but also soaking up much of the agencies precious funds that could be used on projects that are instead used to fund court cases.

Both the Feds and State agencies suck at managing our OR & WA public lands.

 

[MarAzul]

The law they were sentenced under is the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996.

barfo

Oh. Was this before or after failing to reach agreement on the price of the ranch?

 

[Denny Crane]

I do not know enough about the agenda and situation of the militia to comment on their behavior. And to be honest, do not care enough to study them. However, this is what I do know about our public lands in OR & WA.

The process of managing our OR & WA public lands is broken, broken on both the federal and state levels. The process has been broken for many decades. We are now seeing some of the damage caused by years of mismanagement.

All of the decisions made by federal agencies concerning the ecosystem are made to satisfy political agendas, not to implement the best available science. The power to manage our federal public lands is held by those that control the funding, not by the biologists conducting the tests and studies.

The state public lands and ecosystem of Oregon and Washington are two of the worst managed states in our country. States such as Pennsylvania and West Virginia with far less public lands and far higher population densities have much healthier ecosystems than Oregon and Washington. Why? OR & WA use faulty voodoo science models to manage the ecosystem with funding for projects again controlled by politics. Something is very wrong with how OR & WA manage our public lands.

State level managers that have run successful programs in other states have been hired into OR & WA agencies. The only way they survive in their jobs here is if they completely give in to the system here, and give up trying to implement programs that have worked in other states. Many of them just give up after a couple of months and return to their old states.

And this does not even get into the damage to our OR & WA public lands caused by special interest groups filing lawsuits. Not only damage they are causing that results in an imbalance to the environment, but also soaking up much of the agencies precious funds that could be used on projects that are instead used to fund court cases.

Both the Feds and State agencies suck at managing our OR & WA public lands.

"People bad, government good."

-- barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

http://www.tsln.com/news/18837869-113/where-theres-smoke

Judge Michael Hogan, however, did not give the two men the minimum sentence called for under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, saying it would have been “grossly disproportionate” to the crime. He added that a longer sentence would not meet any idea he has of justice and that he didn’t believe congress intended that act to be applied in cases like the Hammond one. A longer sentence than the few months he gave them would “shock his conscience” he said.


Many more details at the link, a great background on the story.

 

[MarAzul]

I put out a fire started by a lightening strike of a lone pine right near the border of my land and the BLM land. It burn about a half acre of my land and maybe the same on the BLM side.
That was 1994 I think. Damn I guess I am very lucky it was before the terrorist laws. Then on the other hand, they didn't want to buy my ranch either.

 

[barfo]

Like "emergency " stimulus bill?

I don't think so.

Your kind calls it ...

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/03/3735647/malheur-lake-oregon-militia-explainer/

the federal anti-terrorism law that prosecutors used to punish the fires includes mandatory minimum sentences of 5 years for fires that damage public property but cause no injury or death.

The federal judge that heard the case gave appropriate sentences for the act. The overzealous prosecutors didn't have to appeal.

It IS an anti-terrorism law (primarily). That's why it has that name. It doesn't mean that the Hammonds are terrorists (although, arguably, they are).
The prosecutors did not accuse them of being terrorists. They were not convicted of being terrorists. They were convicted of arson.

The judge that originally sentenced them broke the law by not applying the legal minimum sentences. There's no question about that.

barfo

 

[barfo]

http://www.tsln.com/news/18837869-113/where-theres-smoke

Judge Michael Hogan, however, did not give the two men the minimum sentence called for under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, saying it would have been “grossly disproportionate” to the crime. He added that a longer sentence would not meet any idea he has of justice and that he didn’t believe congress intended that act to be applied in cases like the Hammond one. A longer sentence than the few months he gave them would “shock his conscience” he said.


Many more details at the link, a great background on the story.

Too bad, he got overruled. Happens all the time.

barfo

 

[barfo]

Not terribly relevant, but interesting:

He said the Hammonds disapproved that he'd used a paperclip to carve two initials in his chest, according to a Harney County sheriff's deputy who interviewed the boy. The teenager told the investigator "Steve used a very coarse sand paper to sand off the initials," the deputy's report said. The teen said Dwight Hammond left the room but that Susan Hammond stayed, telling him to clean up afterward and "not to have a pity party," the report said.

Steve Hammond was charged with criminal mistreatment, but a diversion agreement got the charge dismissed. He had to take anger management classes, perform 40 hours of community service, and stay away from his nephew.

Dwight Hammond explained it was "decided by the family" to sand off the initials, the investigating deputy wrote. None of the Hammonds would say who did the sanding, the investigator's report said.

Steve Hammond did make one thing clear during their three-hour interview, the investigator wrote, telling the deputy "he did not agree with the government getting involved in family matters."

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

It IS an anti-terrorism law (primarily). That's why it has that name. It doesn't mean that the Hammonds are terrorists (although, arguably, they are).
The prosecutors did not accuse them of being terrorists. They were not convicted of being terrorists. They were convicted of arson.

The judge that originally sentenced them broke the law by not applying the legal minimum sentences. There's no question about that.

barfo

There are no other arson statutes?

The local ranchers feel these people were targeted by the government as a means to force them to sell their land.

Government land barons.

Not the solution, it is the problem.

 

[Denny Crane]

barfo

You and your kind are the gift that keeps giving.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/poll-political-party-identify-217562

Gallup: Share of Democrats reaches record low

The share of Americans identifying as Democrats dropped to a record low in 2015, according to the latest Gallup results published Monday, in the latest indication that Americans’ attachment to either political party is at or nearing historical lows.

Overall, 42 percent over the course of the past year identified as independents, a slight drop from the 43 percent who identified as such in 2014. While Democrats maintained a small advantage over Republicans — 29 percent to 26 percent — the Democratic share is at its lowest in Gallup history.

("the majority of the people blah blah" - yeah right.)

 

[oldfisherman]

http://www.tsln.com/news/18837869-113/where-theres-smoke

Judge Michael Hogan, however, did not give the two men the minimum sentence called for under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, saying it would have been “grossly disproportionate” to the crime. He added that a longer sentence would not meet any idea he has of justice and that he didn’t believe congress intended that act to be applied in cases like the Hammond one. A longer sentence than the few months he gave them would “shock his conscience” he said.


Many more details at the link, a great background on the story.

Thanks for posting the link to the article, it helped explain what is really going on.

I do not understand why the Hammond’s where given a prison sentence the first time? Backfires are used all the time to control wildfires. Fires have been used to improve the habitat for many centuries. This is all about people with political power and special interest groups pushing their own faulty agendas (again).

I believe Amanda Marshall (US. Attorney for the state of Oregon) appealing the original prison sentence was a criminal misuse of government power. No wonder the Bundy militia is upset. Here is a link to help understand who Amanda Marshall is.

http://theconservativetreehouse.com...r-at-the-heart-of-the-hammond-family-problem/

 

[Nikolokolus]

Just saying that the Hammonds were innocently back burning their property is probably inaccurate. Several witnesses testified against them at trial, in particular some hunters and even a relative (doubtful that they were all commie pinkos with an axe to grind against ranchers).

http://www.kgw.com/news/local/easte...-the-center-of-the-oregon-occupation/11749883

"The Hammonds also have ignited uncontrolled fires under cover of naturally occurring dry lightning storms which occur on the western slopes of the Steens Mountain in late summers," then-United States Attorney Dwight C. Holton wrote in the indictment. "For more than twenty years, Hammond family members have been responsible for multiple fires in the Steens Mountain area."

A jury convicted the pair of starting the 2001 Hardie-Hammond Fire that burned 139 acres of BLM land. Steven Hammond was also convicted of intentionally starting the 2006 Lower Bridge Creek Fire. Despite the five-year mandatory minimum for a federal arson conviction, Judge Michael Hogan sentenced the elder Hammond to three months behind bars and his son to a year and a day.

But after prosecutors appealed the decision, both men were resentenced in October to the five-year mandatory minimum. They were allowed to self-surrender after the holidays.

Acting United States Attorney Billy J. Williams wrote in a Dec. 7 op-ed in the Burns Times Herald that the Hammonds' backers did not have the whole story.

"I understand that there are some individuals and organizations who object to the Hammonds returning to prison to serve the remainder of their sentences mandated by statute," he wrote. "I respect their right to peacefully disagree with the prison terms imposed. However, any criminal behavior contemplated by those who may object to the court's mandate that harms someone will not be tolerated and will result in serious consequences."

Supporters of the two men maintain the Hammonds started fires to destroy invasive species and protect their property by removing wildfire fuels, and that flames spread to public lands inadvertently.

But witnesses in the trial told a different story. The jury heard from three witnesses who were hunting in 2001 when they saw the Hammonds shoot over their heads to illegally slaughter a herd of deer, according to court documents. A short time later, the hunters testified, they had to abandon their camp because of a fire burning in the area.

A teenage relative of the Hammonds also testified during the trial that Steven Hammond gave him a box of matches and told him to drop lit matches on the ground to "light up the whole county on fire," Williams wrote.

Williams says photographs and testimony from the hunting guide proved the fires were set hours before Steven Hammond called the BLM to report he was about to conduct a burn of invasive species in the area.

As to whether or not their sentences are fair, I don't think so. I believe the original judge handed down a fair sentence and I think it was inappropriate for the prosecutor to appeal, but here we are.

The real tragedy in this idiotic standoff is that now the occupation of the refuge is the only story being reported and the Hammonds being railroaded by minimum sentences is completely forgotten. Hell even the demands of the occupiers seems to be solely concerned with policy change at the federal level with respect to land use.

 

[oldfisherman]

Just saying that the Hammonds were innocently back burning their property is probably inaccurate. Several witnesses testified against them at trial, in particular some hunters and even a relative (doubtful that they were all commie pinkos with an axe to grind against ranchers).

http://www.kgw.com/news/local/easte...-the-center-of-the-oregon-occupation/11749883



As to whether or not their sentences are fair, I don't think so. I believe the original judge handed down a fair sentence and I think it was inappropriate for the prosecutor to appeal, but here we are.

The real tragedy in this idiotic standoff is that now the occupation of the refuge is the only story being reported and the Hammonds being railroaded by minimum sentences is completely forgotten. Hell even the demands of the occupiers seems to be solely concerned with policy change at the federal level with respect to land use.

Agree with you, the militia is only using this issue to gain exposure to push their agenda. I give them the same lack of credibility I gave to the kids than hung from a Portland bridge with ropes to attract public attention for their own special interest. Both groups are extremists using the media, but on opposite sides of the spectrum.

BTW, I tried to warn people on this site in that bridge hanging thread that the antiterrorism act had faulty wording and huge loopholes. It was only a matter of time before a Federal employee abused the power in that act.

The question I would have for the hunting guide (I am a hunter). Did he report the Hammonds poaching at that time like all good hunters should?

I know several hunting, river and fishing guides very well. They are not the most honest when it comes to protecting and promoting their business. I have been lied to by many guides. I have had them apply pressure on me to leave their area. One river guide unknown to me pulled a pistol on me and my lady telling us to drop our tent and load up our raft and leave his campsite. He had just beached with a large group. I told the asshole we got here first, but there was room enough for everyone, and welcome to my campsite.


For me, the damning testimony was given by the relative. The question becomes, what is a fair penalty? The first judge probably got it right.

 

[Denny Crane]

Thanks for posting the link to the article, it helped explain what is really going on.

I do not understand why the Hammond’s where given a prison sentence the first time? Backfires are used all the time to control wildfires. Fires have been used to improve the habitat for many centuries. This is all about people with political power and special interest groups pushing their own faulty agendas (again).

I believe Amanda Marshall (US. Attorney for the state of Oregon) appealing the original prison sentence was a criminal misuse of government power. No wonder the Bundy militia is upset. Here is a link to help understand who Amanda Marshall is.

http://theconservativetreehouse.com...r-at-the-heart-of-the-hammond-family-problem/

They did set the fires and admitted so in court. Basically admitted guilt. They were charged with 9 "crimes" and only found "guilty" on those two.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Agree with you, the militia is only using this issue to gain exposure to push their agenda. I give them the same lack of credibility I gave to the kids than hung from a Portland bridge with ropes to attract public attention for their own special interest. Both groups are extremists using the media, but on opposite sides of the spectrum.

BTW, I tried to warn people on this site in that bridge hanging thread that the antiterrorism act had faulty wording and huge loopholes. It was only a matter of time before a Federal employee abused the power in that act.

The question I would have for the hunting guide (I am a hunter). Did he report the Hammonds poaching at that time like all good hunters should?

I know several hunting, river and fishing guides very well. They are not the most honest when it comes to protecting and promoting their business. I have been lied to by many guides. I have had them apply pressure on me to leave their area. One river guide unknown to me pulled a pistol on me and my lady telling us to drop our tent and load up our raft and leave his campsite. He had just beached with a large group. I told the asshole we got here first, but there was room enough for everyone, and welcome to my campsite.


For me, the damning testimony was given by the relative. The question becomes, what is a fair penalty? The first judge probably got it right.

Not really important, but I'm OCD about this kind of thing: Since I don't know the guide, presuming he's shady because other guides have been shady is faulty logic.

 

[oldfisherman]

Not really important, but I'm OCD about this kind of thing: Since I don't know the guide, presuming he's shady because other guides have been shady is faulty logic.

But not as faulty as the voodoo science models our public land managers are now using to manage the public land and wildlife in OR & WA.

The models used to manage our public resources are far less accurate then the models used by ESPN trade machine to predict how changing players on a team will affect a win/lose record. There are just too many unknown variables that can not be plugged into those kinds of models for them to work accurately. At least ESPN has accurate historical numbers to work with. Much of the information plugged into public land and wildlife models is pure guess work.

For ESPN, model variables such as team chemistry and injuries are impossible to predict. Same with public land use models. It is impossible to predict when draughts, heavy snow, and huge wildfire seasons will occur and the impact they would have on both land and wildlife resources.

The worst wildlife model every created was the wolf re-introduction model. It was so faulty at predicting wolf population growth and the effects the wolf populations would have on other species that the feds trashed that model in less than 2 years. Now the wolf re-introduction is a run-away train wrecking havoc on the models of many other wildlife species.

 

[MarAzul]

Oh, Shit! That woman!!!

"First, she was an Obama appointee."

" Before that, she served as a deputy district attorney in Coos County. Why? Apparently it was because the White House wanted a woman for the job."

"In the 'Coos,' they called her 'Black Heart'"

Yes I remember this, err lady.

 

[MARIS61]

The Hammonds are suspected of other arsons, at least 7, that burned a total of over 46,000 acres of public land.

 

[MarAzul]

The Hammonds are suspected of other arsons, at least 7, that burned a total of over 46,000 acres of public land.

What law was on the books prior to 1996 that would have been appropriate to charge these guys with for the fire in 2001? The fire they are charged with later, the backfire seems a real reach.
I don't know, these guys maybe bad dudes, but it seems odd they were charge years later, after declining to sell their land to the government. What law would have been appropriate, terrorism seems to be a stretch too far? I bet that law would not have a minimum sentence of 5 years. The prosecutor that appealed their sentence to enforce the 5 year sentence has a reputation here in Coos county as a real, well a word I hate to use, so I will be kind and use 'asshole'.

 

[barfo]

What law was on the books prior to 1996 that would have been appropriate to charge these guys with for the fire in 2001? The fire they are charged with later, the backfire seems a real reach.
I don't know, these guys maybe bad dudes, but it seems odd they were charge years later, after declining to sell their land to the government. What law would have been appropriate, terrorism seems to be a stretch too far? I bet that law would not have a minimum sentence of 5 years. The prosecutor that appealed their sentence to enforce the 5 year sentence has a reputation here in Coos county as a real, well a word I hate to use, so I will be kind and use 'asshole'.

Sure, that may be so, maybe she's not a nice person.

However, realize that a jury 'of their peers' convicted them of violating that statute, and the appeals court reversed the minimal sentencing. So it isn't just her.

barfo

 

[MarAzul]

So it isn't just her.
barfo

I don't know what the Jury knew of the minumum sentence involve. The jury was not involved with the appeal that got the minimum sentence imposed. Just her! It seem to be "just her" also in the sense, that I can't find a case where the prosecution has ever appealed a conviction sentence. My god! this one was appealed after the sentence had been served. Holy Cow! it was appealed after they declined to sell the ranch to the government! Wow, she stands unique in quite a few ways! Astonishing really.

 

[Denny Crane]

Sure, that may be so, maybe she's not a nice person.

However, realize that a jury 'of their peers' convicted them of violating that statute, and the appeals court reversed the minimal sentencing. So it isn't just her.

barfo

The evidence being they confessed to starting the fires vs something the prosecution proved.

SMH

 

[barfo]

I don't know what the Jury knew of the minumum sentence involve. The jury was not involved with the appeal that got the minimum sentence imposed. Just her!

No, not just her. Just her and the appeals court.

It seem to be "just her" also in the sense, that I can't find a case where the prosecution has ever appealed a conviction sentence.

Then you haven't looked very hard at all. Or you are bad at research?

My god! this one was appealed after the sentence had been served. Holy Cow! it was appealed after they declined to sell the ranch to the government! Wow, she stands unique in quite a few ways! Astonishing really.

If you say so. I would certainly agree there appears to have been plenty of bad blood between the Hammonds and the government.

Poke the bear repeatedly as the Hammonds did, you should maybe expect to get mauled. Doesn't make the bear right, but it does make the Hammonds kind of stupid.

barfo