Meet the militia

[Samson]

I'd like to nominate Luddly for the honor of smartest person on this forum.



After moi, of course.

No doubt the votes are pouring in.....

 

[Stephanie]

I'd like to nominate Luddly for the honor of smartest person on this forum.



After moi, of course.

No doubt the votes are pouring in.....

 

[R.C. Christian]

I'm certain Dudley's constituency will have problems with the voting process. Hanging chads, no free malt liquor outside, but at least they'll have the support of the black panthers.

 

[Stephanie]

hey nothinkprogress they are in your closets, under your beds...they are HERE

stock on diapers

 

[Samson]

What law did they break?

Please keep in mind that I'm not the legal scholar that so many rw's are but this is the statue I believe applies. If I am incorrect, I hope someone will post the correct statute.

I've posted this before so for those who actually read info before making decisions, my apologies. This is for the idiots who refuse to educate themselves and probably won't read this anyway.

18 U.S. Code § 111 - Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees | LII / Legal Information Institute

18 U.S. Code § 111 - Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees

(a) In General.— Whoever—
(1) forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with any person designated in section 1114 of this title while engaged in or on account of the performance of official duties; or
(2) forcibly assaults or intimidates any person who formerly served as a person designated in section 1114 on account of the performance of official duties during such person’s term of service,
shall, where the acts in violation of this section constitute only simple assault, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, and where such acts involve physical contact with the victim of that assault or the intent to commit another felony, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
(b) Enhanced Penalty.— Whoever, in the commission of any acts described in subsection (a), uses a deadly or dangerous weapon (including a weapon intended to cause death or danger but that fails to do so by reason of a defective component) or inflicts bodily injury, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

I will agree: You're no legal scholar.

But I assure you that the Federal Government employs more than a few, and if they felt any law had been broken, they'd be the first to enforce it (E.g. Ruby Ridge).

The Federal Government has other means of collecting the $1 million to which they've laid claim: Bundy's family will eventually be ejected from the property, and it will be sold, and a lien will be placed upon every cent of income Bundy earns for the remainder of his life.

The solution here is to expel liberal lawmakers from congress, and replace them with lawmakers who will reduce the power of the federal government to where it was originally intended to be: almost nothing.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Meet The Militia Rushing To Cliven Bundy's Defense | ThinkProgress

......The militia movement is back, it is here in force and they seem to be roving the country looking for opportunities like this to make themselves known.....

..... I love this country. Love it. Top to bottom. When I say the pledge of allegiance, I mean it......

These people live in LaLa Land. Really. Its all just a huge fantasy for them. They break the law in order to defend a fellow criminal, put women out in front to take the gunfire and pretend its all because they love the country they say they don't recognize.

And they are frightened little bunny rabbits.

..... I think it is time for all of you to Join the Militia! Look what is happening at The Bundy Ranch in NV. That could happen here next! .....

I've asked this before but -

Not all of these people are on welfare. Some actually have to earn a living and will eventually have to go home and pay their bills.

What happens when Bundy doesn't have all those women surrounding him?

Every time you post the necessity becomes clear that a statute is needed along these lines:
Computers should come with a lock-out option for people like you that can only be unlocked by getting above 90 on an IQ test.


It is obvious that you are clueless as to who the militia is.



1. George Mason, Father of the Bill of Rights:"I ask, Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." (Jonathan Elliot, The Debates of the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, [NY: Burt Franklin,1888] p.425-6)


2. The Constitution gave Congress the power to raise and support a national army, and to organize “the Militia.” This is because an army didn’t naturally exist, while “the Militia” only had to be organized: it always existed. (See enumerated powers in Article 1,Section 8.)



3. The Supreme Court, in US v. Miller, (1939) “…militia system…implied the general obligation of all adult male inhabitants to possess arms, and, with certain exceptions, to cooperate in the work of defence.” It concluded that the militia was primarily civilians.
Today, federal law defines “the militia of the United States” to include all able-bodied males from 17 to 45 and members of the National Guard up to age 64, but excluding those who have no intention of becoming citizens, and active military personnel. (US Code Title 10, sect. 311-313)

[]10 U.S. Code § 311 - Militia: composition and classes | LII / Legal Information Institute





Tragic that someone like you can cancel my vote.

 

[peach174]

What law did they break?

Please keep in mind that I'm not the legal scholar that so many rw's are but this is the statue I believe applies. If I am incorrect, I hope someone will post the correct statute.

I've posted this before so for those who actually read info before making decisions, my apologies. This is for the idiots who refuse to educate themselves and probably won't read this anyway.

18 U.S. Code § 111 - Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees | LII / Legal Information Institute

18 U.S. Code § 111 - Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees

(a) In General.— Whoever—
(1) forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with any person designated in section 1114 of this title while engaged in or on account of the performance of official duties; or
(2) forcibly assaults or intimidates any person who formerly served as a person designated in section 1114 on account of the performance of official duties during such person’s term of service,
shall, where the acts in violation of this section constitute only simple assault, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, and where such acts involve physical contact with the victim of that assault or the intent to commit another felony, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
(b) Enhanced Penalty.— Whoever, in the commission of any acts described in subsection (a), uses a deadly or dangerous weapon (including a weapon intended to cause death or danger but that fails to do so by reason of a defective component) or inflicts bodily injury, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

They did not do any of those things.
Did BLM round up and keep his cattle?
Yes they did. That means they were able to do their duty.
When did they do this? Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees duties.

If you think they did break any of this law, why wasn't anybody arrested for it?
The Militia that showed up are legal militia's from their States.
Arizona's was there and Gov. Brewer made them legal in 2011.
Brewer signs bill authorizing volunteer state militia | Arizona Capitol Times

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'd like to nominate Luddly for the honor of smartest person on this forum.



After moi, of course.

There is no doubt that the two of you have much in common.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Looks like none of the nutters actually READ the link.

That's why they're called The Party Of Stupid.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Computers should come with a lock-out option for people like you that can only be unlocked by getting above 90 on an IQ test.

Be some empty damn forums.

 

[Katzndogz]

What law did they break?

Please keep in mind that I'm not the legal scholar that so many rw's are but this is the statue I believe applies. If I am incorrect, I hope someone will post the correct statute.

I've posted this before so for those who actually read info before making decisions, my apologies. This is for the idiots who refuse to educate themselves and probably won't read this anyway.

18 U.S. Code § 111 - Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees | LII / Legal Information Institute

18 U.S. Code § 111 - Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees

(a) In General.— Whoever—
(1) forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with any person designated in section 1114 of this title while engaged in or on account of the performance of official duties; or
(2) forcibly assaults or intimidates any person who formerly served as a person designated in section 1114 on account of the performance of official duties during such person’s term of service,
shall, where the acts in violation of this section constitute only simple assault, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, and where such acts involve physical contact with the victim of that assault or the intent to commit another felony, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.
(b) Enhanced Penalty.— Whoever, in the commission of any acts described in subsection (a), uses a deadly or dangerous weapon (including a weapon intended to cause death or danger but that fails to do so by reason of a defective component) or inflicts bodily injury, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

I will agree: You're no legal scholar.

But I assure you that the Federal Government employs more than a few, and if they felt any law had been broken, they'd be the first to enforce it (E.g. Ruby Ridge).

The Federal Government has other means of collecting the $1 million to which they've laid claim: Bundy's family will eventually be ejected from the property, and it will be sold, and a lien will be placed upon every cent of income Bundy earns for the remainder of his life.

The solution here is to expel liberal lawmakers from congress, and replace them with lawmakers who will reduce the power of the federal government to where it was originally intended to be: almost nothing.

Any lien would be against Bundy personally and would not run with the land like a mortgage. While the government MAY try to enforce a lien against him personally, the exemptions given to a person over 70 would preclude the government from ever getting anything from him personally. His personal debt could be enforced against his estate when he dies, as long as the estate itself is not tied up in some legal mechanism like a trust. Any lien unsatisfied in ten years will automatically expire.

The solution is to replace liberal law makers that do not practice the same kind of selective prosecution and put people like Bundy on the same footing as the drug dealers growing marijuana in the national forests and the tax absconding federal employees.

 

[peach174]

Looks like none of the nutters actually READ the link.

That's why they're called The Party Of Stupid.

I did, but I bet you did not read my link.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

What law did they break?

Please keep in mind that I'm not the legal scholar that so many rw's are but this is the statue I believe applies. If I am incorrect, I hope someone will post the correct statute.

I've posted this before so for those who actually read info before making decisions, my apologies. This is for the idiots who refuse to educate themselves and probably won't read this anyway.

18 U.S. Code § 111 - Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees | LII / Legal Information Institute

I will agree: You're no legal scholar.

But I assure you that the Federal Government employs more than a few, and if they felt any law had been broken, they'd be the first to enforce it (E.g. Ruby Ridge).

The Federal Government has other means of collecting the $1 million to which they've laid claim: Bundy's family will eventually be ejected from the property, and it will be sold, and a lien will be placed upon every cent of income Bundy earns for the remainder of his life.

The solution here is to expel liberal lawmakers from congress, and replace them with lawmakers who will reduce the power of the federal government to where it was originally intended to be: almost nothing.

Any lien would be against Bundy personally and would not run with the land like a mortgage. While the government MAY try to enforce a lien against him personally, the exemptions given to a person over 70 would preclude the government from ever getting anything from him personally. His personal debt could be enforced against his estate when he dies, as long as the estate itself is not tied up in some legal mechanism like a trust. Any lien unsatisfied in ten years will automatically expire.

The solution is to replace liberal law makers that do not practice the same kind of selective prosecution and put people like Bundy on the same footing as the drug dealers growing marijuana in the national forests and the tax absconding federal employees.

See? Toldja the rw's are legal scholars. Especially if good ole katzen is wearing his/her/its lawyer hat this week. Next week, he/she/it will ba a doctor. Or, maybe he/she/it will be back to bathing dirty dogs.

As to "... reduce the power of the federal government to where it was originally intended to be: almost nothing", it was Ronnie Ray-Gun who enacted, by Executive Order #12548, the act that Bundy agreed to abide by but has not.

 

[Katzndogz]

It is unlikely that Reagan knew that the laws would be so abused by the government. No one ever expected the United States would turn into a dictatorship.

 

[TruthSeeker56]

Obviously, when the citizen soldiers there leave, they will be replaced by other citizen soldiers. And when they leave, they will be replaced by others.

The one thing the country has plenty of, is citizens fed up with the oppressive tyranny obamaland has become.

But, as you know, as they know, Obama has nothing at all to do with this. Bundy started it long before Obama was elected.

But, I s'pose its possible the chronic malcontents, er, uh, militia could take turns putting women and children in danger in order to aid and abet a criminal. But for how long? How long can this criminal continue to break the law that his hero passed by executive order?

Luddly is OBVIOUSLY scared to death (no pun intended) of law-abiding citizens with firearms.

Have you ever even TOUCHED a firearm, Luddly? And no, slingshots and squirt guns don't count.

So at what point in your life did you decide that inanimate objects have the ability to kill people, Luddly?

At what point did you deduce that criminals and other lawbreakers are NOT responsible for their actions, and it's GUNS that kill people, not BAD people who kill GOOD people.

If an armed intruder broke into your home, what would you do, Luddly? Grab a steak knife and try to TALK the intruder into submission? Maybe bend over and offer yourself to the intruder, in exchange for your life?

You're a SHAMEFUL, SHALLOW, and SOUL-LESS human being, Luddly. Your kind will NEVER prevail, at least not for long.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Looks like none of the nutters actually READ the link.

That's why they're called The Party Of Stupid.

I did, but I bet you did not read my link.

Your link won't load so I ignored it. BUT going ONLY BY YOUR COMMENT, (a) that's AZ, (b) fed takes precedent over state. Deal with it.

And, none of that really matters because the bottom line is still the very simple fact that Bundy agreed to abide by his govt welfare grazing law he signed. He has not done that. He's been to court twice and lost both times.

He's a criminal.

That he's also a liar about not recognizing the US govt and a racist and a terrorist wannabe doesn't really enter into it.

Sooner or later, he's going to jail and it's likely it won't be easy time for him. He did that to himself too.

 

[Katzndogz]

I will agree: You're no legal scholar.

But I assure you that the Federal Government employs more than a few, and if they felt any law had been broken, they'd be the first to enforce it (E.g. Ruby Ridge).

The Federal Government has other means of collecting the $1 million to which they've laid claim: Bundy's family will eventually be ejected from the property, and it will be sold, and a lien will be placed upon every cent of income Bundy earns for the remainder of his life.

The solution here is to expel liberal lawmakers from congress, and replace them with lawmakers who will reduce the power of the federal government to where it was originally intended to be: almost nothing.

Any lien would be against Bundy personally and would not run with the land like a mortgage. While the government MAY try to enforce a lien against him personally, the exemptions given to a person over 70 would preclude the government from ever getting anything from him personally. His personal debt could be enforced against his estate when he dies, as long as the estate itself is not tied up in some legal mechanism like a trust. Any lien unsatisfied in ten years will automatically expire.

The solution is to replace liberal law makers that do not practice the same kind of selective prosecution and put people like Bundy on the same footing as the drug dealers growing marijuana in the national forests and the tax absconding federal employees.

See? Toldja the rw's are legal scholars. Especially if good ole katzen is wearing his/her/its lawyer hat this week. Next week, he/she/it will ba a doctor. Or, maybe he/she/it will be back to bathing dirty dogs.

As to "... reduce the power of the federal government to where it was originally intended to be: almost nothing", it was Ronnie Ray-Gun who enacted, by Executive Order #12548, the act that Bundy agreed to abide by but has not.

Yes it is true. I closed a very successful law office to bathe dirty dogs. I was compelled to do so. I just got to hating liberals so much that it wasn't fair to represent them. They are evil people. Unworthy of the very air they breathe. The honesty of dogs was refreshing. It may be that liberals might object to being a lesser being than a dog abandoned in an alley. Too bad. They are worth less than the fleas on such dogs.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Obviously, when the citizen soldiers there leave, they will be replaced by other citizen soldiers. And when they leave, they will be replaced by others.

The one thing the country has plenty of, is citizens fed up with the oppressive tyranny obamaland has become.

But, as you know, as they know, Obama has nothing at all to do with this. Bundy started it long before Obama was elected.

But, I s'pose its possible the chronic malcontents, er, uh, militia could take turns putting women and children in danger in order to aid and abet a criminal. But for how long? How long can this criminal continue to break the law that his hero passed by executive order?

Luddly is OBVIOUSLY scared to death (no pun intended) of law-abiding citizens with firearms.

Have you ever even TOUCHED a firearm, Luddly? And no, slingshots and squirt guns don't count.

So at what point in your life did you decide that inanimate objects have the ability to kill people, Luddly?

At what point did you deduce that criminals and other lawbreakers are NOT responsible for their actions, and it's GUNS that kill people, not BAD people who kill GOOD people.

If an armed intruder broke into your home, what would you do, Luddly? Grab a steak knife and try to TALK the intruder into submission? Maybe bend over and offer yourself to the intruder, in exchange for your life?

You're a SHAMEFUL, SHALLOW, and SOUL-LESS human being, Luddly. Your kind will NEVER prevail, at least not for long.

I AM a law-abiding citizen who owns guns.

I have had the experience of having an intruder break into my home and he ended up dead.

That has no relevance to the domestic terrorists who stupidly think they're gonna take on the federal govt and win.

 

[peach174]

I will agree: You're no legal scholar.

But I assure you that the Federal Government employs more than a few, and if they felt any law had been broken, they'd be the first to enforce it (E.g. Ruby Ridge).

The Federal Government has other means of collecting the $1 million to which they've laid claim: Bundy's family will eventually be ejected from the property, and it will be sold, and a lien will be placed upon every cent of income Bundy earns for the remainder of his life.

The solution here is to expel liberal lawmakers from congress, and replace them with lawmakers who will reduce the power of the federal government to where it was originally intended to be: almost nothing.

Any lien would be against Bundy personally and would not run with the land like a mortgage. While the government MAY try to enforce a lien against him personally, the exemptions given to a person over 70 would preclude the government from ever getting anything from him personally. His personal debt could be enforced against his estate when he dies, as long as the estate itself is not tied up in some legal mechanism like a trust. Any lien unsatisfied in ten years will automatically expire.

The solution is to replace liberal law makers that do not practice the same kind of selective prosecution and put people like Bundy on the same footing as the drug dealers growing marijuana in the national forests and the tax absconding federal employees.

See? Toldja the rw's are legal scholars. Especially if good ole katzen is wearing his/her/its lawyer hat this week. Next week, he/she/it will ba a doctor. Or, maybe he/she/it will be back to bathing dirty dogs.

As to "... reduce the power of the federal government to where it was originally intended to be: almost nothing", it was Ronnie Ray-Gun who enacted, by Executive Order #12548, the act that Bundy agreed to abide by but has not.

Of which he did pay, till the BLM took away grazing permits and put non extinct desert tortoises over cattle grazing.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Any lien would be against Bundy personally and would not run with the land like a mortgage. While the government MAY try to enforce a lien against him personally, the exemptions given to a person over 70 would preclude the government from ever getting anything from him personally. His personal debt could be enforced against his estate when he dies, as long as the estate itself is not tied up in some legal mechanism like a trust. Any lien unsatisfied in ten years will automatically expire.

The solution is to replace liberal law makers that do not practice the same kind of selective prosecution and put people like Bundy on the same footing as the drug dealers growing marijuana in the national forests and the tax absconding federal employees.

See? Toldja the rw's are legal scholars. Especially if good ole katzen is wearing his/her/its lawyer hat this week. Next week, he/she/it will ba a doctor. Or, maybe he/she/it will be back to bathing dirty dogs.

As to "... reduce the power of the federal government to where it was originally intended to be: almost nothing", it was Ronnie Ray-Gun who enacted, by Executive Order #12548, the act that Bundy agreed to abide by but has not.

Yes it is true. I closed a very successful law office to bathe dirty dogs. I was compelled to do so. I just got to hating liberals so much that it wasn't fair to represent them. They are evil people. Unworthy of the very air they breathe. The honesty of dogs was refreshing. It may be that liberals might object to being a lesser being than a dog abandoned in an alley. Too bad. They are worth less than the fleas on such dogs.

And your very successful medical practice ... ?