Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

edgineered

(2,101 posts) Fri Apr 18, 2014, 08:21 PM Apr 2014

Destruction of government property in re the cattle

Maybe I tend to overly simplify things, yet still, why have I not heard anyone suggest that the cattle be fenced in on the federal land?

Would not the attempt to remove the cattle then necessitate taking down the fence and destroying government property, or any other basic illegal activity? Would an immediate on site arrest of the perpetrator be viewed differently?

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Destruction of government property in re the cattle (Original Post) edgineered Apr 2014 OP

They should also charge the armed militia folks, especially those who Hoyt Apr 2014 #1

En masse or specific incidents? Hip_Flask Apr 2014 #2

Probably easiest to convict those brandishing weapons, but I bet some of the others Hoyt Apr 2014 #3

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)

1. They should also charge the armed militia folks, especially those who

Reply to edgineered (Original post)

Fri Apr 18, 2014, 08:32 PM

Apr 2014

played sniper and intimidators.

Hip_Flask

(233 posts)

2. En masse or specific incidents?

Reply to Hoyt (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 18, 2014, 08:33 PM

Apr 2014

IOW, everyone who showed up to support or just those who brandished a weapon improperly etc.. etc...?

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)

3. Probably easiest to convict those brandishing weapons, but I bet some of the others

Reply to Hip_Flask (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 18, 2014, 08:47 PM

Apr 2014

are chargeable as well -- interfering with law enforcement, terrorism, loitering, public nuisance, crossing state lines with terroristic intent, etc. Get creative, no need to protect these gun toting racist terrorists. Don't you agree?

Reply to this discussion