The Bundys and the Armed Occupation of a National Wildlife Refuge

War, no. Insurrection? yes.Enjoy

Brilliant idea: Oregon brothers launch anti-Bundy fundraising campaign

OK, so we can't hang 'em. But can we suspend them? From a rope around their necks?

Oh, we can hang 'em. Illegally occupying federal land is treason.

You're counting it as "levying war"?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

John Brown. But we don't want to make martyrs of them either.Most insurrections were "resolved" by guns in the past, but I would prefer a more peaceful result: jail for several decades, seizing all their property, and assets to pay fees, etc.Enjoy

Can't find it right how, but one site did post a part of a law saying that occupying federal land (among other things) is treason.

Interestingly google quickly jumps to treason definition united states implying that a lot of people are searching this.Treason - Wikipedia: "... In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aiding or involved by such an endeavor. ... "Legal Definition of Treason: "The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death. By the same article of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. "TREASON Definition & Meaning - Black's Law Dictionary: "What is TREASON? The offense of attempting to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance; or of betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power. Webster. "It could be argued that they are not so much attempting to overthrow the government as they are trying to subvert it to their purposes.It seems to me that insurrection is more accurate, and here we haveInsurrection Act of 1807 - Wikipedia "The Insurrection Act of 1807 is the set of laws that govern the ability of the President of the United States to deploy troops within the United States to put down lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion. The laws are chiefly contained in 10 U.S.C. 331—335. The general aim is to limit Presidential power as much as possible, relying on state and local governments for initial response in the event of insurrection. Coupled with the Posse Comitatus Act, Presidential powers for law enforcement are limited and delayed."18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute: "18 U.S. Code 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection: Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."So all those people sending care packages are also guilty ...Enjoy

Why is peaceful better? There is nothing pleasing about the thought of decades in jail. Living in a physical body without living in any real sense is much worse than violence. If I knew they were capturing me to haul me off to a life of prison, I would put a bullet in my brain.

And, in a related militia, two of the leaders got into a drunken fight, and one shot the other dead (and it's being called 'self defense'Page not found | USUNCUT - US News | Breaking News | Latest News Today

He didn't say that peaceful was better from their point of view. Like many nuts, some of them seem to relish the prospect of martyrdom. But it's probably better if we don't give it to them.But even from the criminals' point of view, at least it's nice to have options. I think pretty much anyone in prison could, if he felt like you, commit suicide if he was sufficiently determined; whereas someone who's dead can't decide he'd rather be in jail.

The initial Bundy standoff came at a time when distrust towards the government was at an all-time high. Festering is a slew of violent, disaffected "sovereign citizen" (an oxy-moronic term) anarchists who think they can do whatever they want.They have not had much consequence, and during each standoff they are bolstered thinking about how they beat the federal government in a showdown.The government doesn't want another Waco or Ruby Ridge, as this would only serve to validate the fears of self-described Sovereign Citizens.So how do we ensure that they follow the law without inciting another heavy-handed war?Difficult question to answer

You don't ensure that they follow the law, thank God. You can encourage people to follow the law and you can encourage people to protest what they see as unjust laws but you can only sanction and isolate those who do break laws.

I appreciate your remarks, Hyroglyphx. I know we disagree on much, but the Oregon occupation should upset anyone who believes in the rule of law.The current stand-off is a bipartisan failure of governance. Cliven Bundy has defied the law for two decades, through both Republican and Democratic administrtaions. I don't believe this extraordinary restraint was due to any desire to avoid bloodshed--rather, no one wanted to pay the political price for enforcing the law. Republicans didn't want to alienate their conservative supporters; Democrats didn't want to energize the conservative opposition or increase its ranks. Both failed in their duty to uphold the law and protect the interests of all the people.Federal officials say only that the elder Bundy's crimes remain "under investigation."It is curious that this heroic restraint persisted through a period where law enforcement embraced the "broken window" model of policing: tolerate minor infractions, and you encourage more serious crime. Bundy has serenely continued his crimes, while in the great liberal cities, young black men are stopped and frisked for walking while black.I'd be okay with waiting these yahoos out if I thought they'd face consequences later. It defies belief that Cliven Bundy for 20 years managed to avoid any scenario where he could be uneventfully arrested: law enforcement simply lacked the will.So I'm not optimistic about an aggressive prosecution of the occupiers once they leave the refuge.But the occupiers may not feel so sanguine. Social and news media ring with cries for their prosecution, even among folks from whom they expected support.
They face the risk of financial ruin and prison terms once they no longer stand as an armed group. I don't think they set out to be martyrs--they made a fine calculation based on the expectation of an impotent federal response--but they might well prefer martyrdom to incarceration.So, okay, wait them out. But the scenario needs to change. They need to be contained: one of them steals a refuge truck and is only stopped in town where he went for supplies? That's absurd. They need to be made more uncomfortable--no utilities, no mail, no in-and-out traffic for supplies. Block their cell phones. The local sherriff's offer to escort them to the state line was well-intentioned but wrong-headed: no parades.Preventing these guys from staying, and leaving, on their own terms is essential.

The least painful way to die in prison is hanging. They keep a good watch on that from what I'm told. You have some less painful options before you are handcuffed.