A need was recognized and fulfilled is how I see it.
Nope. It is blocked off now.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-oregon-refuge-roadblocks-20160127-story.html
Aw geeze should we applaud the capture of people who we donāt like/agree with.
Or bemoan trigger happy cops abusing their authority with impunity.
Decisions, decisionsā¦
Fair enough.
Some things are sadder than others.
Iām right there with yaā.
Still sad though.
I donāt even dislike that dead guy, actually.
I just disagree with him.
?
How did that even happen in this case?
The militants remaining in the refuge are well prepared for a long siege. Snacks, sex toys, 55 gallons of lube . . .
Think about what happens next:
Once they clear out of the gift shop and the reporters are let in, there will be the inevitable stories about all the junk left behind by the occupiers. Including a large collection of dildos. With statistics including how many were unboxed.
Dunno whatever happened with that 55-gallon drum of lube, but it can only be seen two ways:
-
The junk left behind by the occupiers, besides dildos, included a 55-gallon drum of lube.
-
The 55-gallon drum of lube was not found. Presumably it was used up.
OMG, who gave assault rifles to Hay Golems?
Per the article:
āShots were fired, but itās unclear who fired first, the source said. Ryan Bundy was wounded, and Finicum died.ā
"The occupiers also claimed Finicum had his hands in the air when he was shot. "
So it is possible the shooting was justified. It is possible it was not.
Haha - Hay Golems. OMG I am totally using that some time.
Er, yeah. So while itās already time to āapplaud the capture of people who we [though maybe not you?] donāt like/agree with,ā itās too soon to decide whether we should ābemoan trigger happy cops abusing their authority with impunity.ā
Got it. I thinkā¦
Itās a bit more than a gift shop.
If we are to believe stories such as this, the occupation disrupted quite a bit more than just the sale of trinkets to visiting birders.
Iām imagining an epic escape plan involving a really long slipānāslide that they lube up and roll out past the armed federal guards and then they all just slide to freedom and justice and the American WayĀ®. Maybe theyāll tie together a raft made of sex toys so they donāt have to get their nice camo oiled up on the way out.
Straw men everywhere!
Iām just enjoying the hypocrisy. Expecting consistency in peopleās biases are really too much ask for and I realize that. I see it everywhere and it is the one thing I try to consciously fight when it comes to myself.
If you are wondering where my alliances lie - wonder no more. I have none in this case. I am not 100% sure what happened to spark this occupation. The government claims it was arson to cover up poaching. The others claim it was a grass burn that got out of hand. Coming from a state full of prairie, I am familiar with grass burning and how they can get out of hand. While I concede the government charges may be 100% correct, I guess it is too much for me to not have a natural distrust that they could be bending the truth or trumping up charges.
Whether the original reason was right or wrong, I do support open protest.What makes it so I canāt support them 100% is they came armed. If they had come in and just done a mass sit in, then I think I would behind their right to protest.
But - I also find it very interesting that because they were armed, the government initially let them alone. Had they done a sit in, how would this have ended? Probably mouths full of pepper spray and cuffs on the first workday. This seems to bolster the argument that the 2nd Amendment protects the 1st, even if I canāt really support its use in this case.
The most recent incident may or may not be justified. I concede the officers may indeed have acted correctly. I just find it interesting that in most cases on this site commenters are not willing to give officers any benefit of the doubt for questionable actions, and super quick to condemn (and lump everyone in the same boat) for clearly wrong actions. But for the most part, no one is doubting the cops acted correctly.
He previously stated that heād die before allowing himself to be arrested, so the two possibilities are
A) He was a lying coward who was killed after surrendering
B) He was an honest jackass who brought death upon himself
Very short press conference today. Simple statements from the FBI and District Attorney (I think it was the DA). The local Sheriff was the only other speaker (went last) and was obviously very upset that things had come to violence in his community. His plea at the end to use normal channels to address grievances got a round of applause.
For months now every time he and his officers make even a routine stop, they will be on edge because it may be one of the violent nuts. This was very unfair to the local community and demonstrates how selfish the Bundy group and people like them can become. Shame on them.
Iād have significant empathy for someone in scenario A - you get caught up in the moment, yelling about liberty or death, and then common sense kicks in. Itās a bit silly, but I donāt need to heap scorn on a dude whoās already dead
If itās scenario B - and Iām guessing it is scenario B, if only because the police knew how much scrutiny this was going to get, then. . . yeah. He was honest, and I guess he thought this was worth dying for? Because he invested a lot of himself in being a part of this thing, or because he didnāt put a super-high value on his own life? I donāt know.
The willingness to die for a cause isnāt the worst aspect of humanity. The fact that he chose this particular battle to give his life for seems spectacularly misguided. I guess you find an issue you think is important, and you surround yourself with other people who think itās important, and suddenly itās super important to you, even if itās kind of penny-ante bullshit to everyone else
Basically, I guess what Iām trying to get at is that I donāt need to shit-talk the dead
I ease what you did three.