Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues The Legal Forum Let's check in on the cattle abusers, deadbeat grazers, wildlife squatter Bundys

You guys let bigswede change the subject...

i suppose one could make the same comment about Exxon-Mobil polluting

some folks like Mr Swede thinks only he matters i.e. he did not tacitly agree to be citizen of the US, and thus his personal "rights" have been infringed.

I suppose the guy on your other side may think your land is not his concern and flood you every year .... divert water away from you .... pollute your land .... etc .... and only Darwin knows who would win

property rights is the underlying motif for Cattle & Bird Terrorists i.e. the Bundy Gang

The best I can figure out is Mr Swede believes federal law does not apply to him, thus he could graze cattle anywhere he wants to, not pay any consequent fees, occupy federal buildings, etc.

YES!

That was the short answer.
The restrictions I mentioned, inflicting harm to property rights was figuratively speaking with varied expressions to make it more comprehensible. Though at the same time they describe the insidious ways the legal wording come into effect for landowners.
Take good look at every regulation that mentions preservation, land management, biodiversity, water, sustainability and so on, and you will find that it always takes away, replaces the landowners right to decide over his property, and hands that right to government agencies.

For that simple reason I am all against preservation as it is presented in the official propaganda. It takes a misconceived starting point in understanding nature and turns it into a misdirected legislation that enslaves the landowner. Agenda 21 is such document. It is functional socialism for all intents and purposes. All of this government meddling in private property rights does nothing good for the environment. It only destroys society and individual liberty.

Of course laws applies to me as much as the next man. All I'm saying is the laws are wrong!

I like your approach to the environment .... frak it

Suppose we had a Darwinian approach to the environment. Every land owner could do whatever they wanted to do.

You would be in favor of strip miners denuding mountains and poisoning ground water
You would be in favor of oil companies spilling oil all over creation and poisoning ground water
you would be in favor of refineries polluting the atmosphere
you would be in favor of cutting all the trees down without replacement
you would be in favor of farmers overusing land until it couldn't grow a weed
etc

I believe the federal government is legitimate and has my approval to provide for the general welfare. Whereas you would prefer a wasteland for your window view, I prefer something more. Something which will provide generations of Americans the opportunity for continued use of the land.

Yes I can see that if I was the only person in the world, government had infringed on my land rights, but I am not the only person in the world. There are 8B people who rely on you making responsible decisions not to infringe on their rights.

In your case those 8B people would be disappointed as you would have polluted their land, poisoned their water and in general destroyed the value of their land all so you could benefit above their interest.

Part and parcel being a citizen requires one give up something to bind the contractual agreement between individual and government.

Bigswede, I know you will think it blaspheme, but land owners hold rights only to the extent assured and actually granted by government. Without government it is grab as grab can

Told you so...

For a guy who claims not to be a conservative, you sure march lock step with them.

Again in one word.
NO!
Those are your own wicked misunderstandings of what I say.
Why do you and others presume that I or other landowners would destroy our property?
Why do you presume that faceless agencies representing a collective of misinformed voters would do a better job? Or even more, that it be necessary to have them do it?

All the experience from history of collective care of anything, proves that what even the greens call the tragedy of the commons is true. The experience from the Soviet era is a striking example. We covered this already in another thread. Did you not pay attention?