Tuesday, April 15, 2014

David Edwards — Former sheriff: Women ‘need to be the first ones shot’ by feds in Bundy Ranch standoff (via Raw Story )

Former sheriff: Women ‘need to be the first ones shot’ by feds in Bundy Ranch standoff (via Raw Story )
A former Arizona sheriff who has taken the side of cattle ranchers in Nevada said this week that he would have allowed his own wife and daughters to be shot as human shields because it would look bad for the federal government on television. In a statement…


8 comments:

Tom Hickey said...

“We were actually strategizing to put all the women up at the front,”

Nothing about the women volunteering for suicide duty either. The men were just going to put them out there.

This is way beyond crazy.

Unknown said...

These people don't have mothers or grandmothers?

Ryan Harris said...

Strong backs, weak minds, they say. I'd approach some of these issues with a bit of humility and not rush to judgement because the people lack eloquence, manners and social etiquette. They raise cattle for a living, they aren't professors and politicians. I'm NOT defending them, I don't know the details. But saying stupid offensive things doesn't mean they are wrong on the law.

What I do know is that property law in the west isn't very intuitive and the concept of commons are much more important and vital to the husbandry communities that exist. When government steps in and takes away common areas needed for water or transport without regard to the community, it can devastate and irreparably harm people in these areas. It resonates among many from all over that come together to help one another in the only way they know how when they feel persecuted. It is a dying culture, it is highly stigmatized and under attack by leftists.

Tom Hickey said...

I'm a commoner and all for free range. But that's not actually the issue here. There are laws in place that I may not like or agree with but as a law-abiding citizen I comply with them while working to get them changed. Confronting officials with weapons is way over the top however one spins the story, and putting women in the line of fire as a propaganda ploy is below despicable.

By the way, it is the Right that is into law and order. I am amazed that conservatives are on board with this. Even Glenn Beck had the sense to advise against violence, and the rest of the nutters on the right are all over him for not backing their criminal conspiracy, which is on the level of David Koresh.

Greg said...

The strategy of these types is very passive aggressive. Walk around armed, use provocative language, bump into someone but don't shoot til THEY do something ...... and then let all hell break loose. Then you can claim you were just defending yourselves.

Its the strategy you must use when you have a losing hand. Make the conflict about something else

Ryan Harris said...

As I read the article I thought of how desperate a person in western culture would have to feel to suggest a woman (revered, powerful, head of family) is the only thing they have left to stop an encroaching corrupt government. Powerful interests such as water and power resources, corn growers and feed lots, developers, environmentalists, mineral developers and others covet the public lands used by these people. Harry Reid would probably horse trade these areas without even a second thought. I'm weary of believing the government's claim about unpaid range fees. These people were probably using the land before the US Government had any rights to the land. The people may hold title to the land and the government refuses to acknowledge it. It really is complicated sometimes. Indian nations will have granted land to people, US Government will have stolen land from the Indians, Then given it back, then claim to manage it... don't assume you understand how complicated things can get. We just don't know. You always have a right to defend yourself and your property with force if necessary, a basic human right. Our government has a long history of being lawless, corrupt and refusing to abide by land ownership agreements when it is no longer convenient.

Daniel said...

"By the way, it is the Right that is into law and order. I am amazed that conservatives are on board with this."

They're on board with this because a Democrat is in the White House. Full stop. The list of things conservatives were A-OK with when Bush II was in power that they screamed bloody murder about when Clinton and now Obama were in office is long and numerous. It goes the other way too of course. Rank partisanship runs deep on all sides.

The Rombach Report said...

It was bone headed and nuts for the Sheriff to suggest that women should be put it the front of the line so that in case anything went wrong the government would look bad.

However, lets not forget how this thing started. Apparently there was a trial regarding this dispute and Bundy lost, but even according to Bundy if he owes anything to the federal government it's $300K not $1 million.

Be that as it may, the government should have attached a lien on Bundy's property. Instead, the BLM sends in 200 agents armed with assault weapons and they set up tapped off "1st Amendment Zones". Last I was aware the 1st Amendment applied to the whole United States. And, what's this story about Harry's Reid's son wanting the land for a solar farm deal with a Chinese company?