Terrorist Attack in Oregon
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-01-2016, 03:26 PM
RE: Terrorist Attack in Oregon
(03-01-2016 01:55 PM)yakherder Wrote:  • This particular action is not about the original conviction and sentence, though disapproval over it has certainly been adding fuel to the fire. It's about the fact that the guy served his sentence, was released, and then they up and decided he needed to serve more time. Protests noted, he went back willingly, and is not associated with this particular group in any way. It is also speculated that this is just a cover up for their real intent, which was to destroy evidence of poaching.

The Judge in the initial case ignored a federal minimum sentence law and sentenced far under that, an appellate court ordered them to return and serve the full 5 year minimum. But really this action has nothing to do with that it is just the excuse they are using for treason and sedition.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
03-01-2016, 04:20 PM
RE: Terrorist Attack in Oregon
Reading this there are a few things that don't seem to make sense to me, maybe somebody can clear it up for me.

So, two guys were leasing some land from the government. They then set fire to it, affecting over 100 acres and this was in 2001. They were tried and convicted of poaching and arson and were sentenced to 5 years.

So did these two gentleman get convicted and sent to prison in 2001??? From the language used the articles state they are having to return to prison, which to me indicates that they have already served some time.

Why 15 years after the initial sentence and incident are they having to go back to prison???

I feel so much, and yet I feel nothing.
I am a rock, I am the sky, the birds and the trees and everything beyond.
I am the wind, in the fields in which I roar. I am the water, in which I drown.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2016, 04:21 PM
RE: Terrorist Attack in Oregon
Popcorn

Carpet bomb them. All I want out of the situation is some interesting news drama. The fact that I think the news on both sides of the political spectrum is biased and untruthful is just a passing thought I felt the need to comment on Tongue

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes yakherder's post
03-01-2016, 04:23 PM
RE: Terrorist Attack in Oregon
Yup... simply kill all involved on both sides.

Start with the lawyers........

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes onlinebiker's post
03-01-2016, 05:05 PM
RE: Terrorist Attack in Oregon
Sounds provocative to me. To sentence some people to prison, for them then to serve their sentence, and then the guberment come along and say that wasn't enough. That you have to go to prison and serve a minimum of 5 years???

How is this not double jeopardy, which is written in your fifth amendment???

I feel so much, and yet I feel nothing.
I am a rock, I am the sky, the birds and the trees and everything beyond.
I am the wind, in the fields in which I roar. I am the water, in which I drown.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes bemore's post
03-01-2016, 05:31 PM
RE: Terrorist Attack in Oregon
(03-01-2016 05:05 PM)bemore Wrote:  Sounds provocative to me. To sentence some people to prison, for them then to serve their sentence, and then the guberment come along and say that wasn't enough. That you have to go to prison and serve a minimum of 5 years???

How is this not double jeopardy, which is written in your fifth amendment???

That's pretty much the issue (theoretically). I don't see how occupying a visitor center and setting a fire is tactically rational in achieving their stated goal, whether one agrees with it or not. But the reincarceration is easily arguable as bullshit.

If their goal is to bring attention to the issue, they'd be better off as martyrs than as self proclaimed 3%ers occupying a cabin in the woods, so again just carpet bomb them and let the shit start flying. I'll grab that popcorn, turn on the news, and grin cynically Hobo

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2016, 05:35 PM
RE: Terrorist Attack in Oregon
(03-01-2016 05:31 PM)yakherder Wrote:  
(03-01-2016 05:05 PM)bemore Wrote:  Sounds provocative to me. To sentence some people to prison, for them then to serve their sentence, and then the guberment come along and say that wasn't enough. That you have to go to prison and serve a minimum of 5 years???

How is this not double jeopardy, which is written in your fifth amendment???

That's pretty much the issue (theoretically). I don't see how occupying a visitor center and setting a fire is tactically rational in achieving their stated goal, whether one agrees with it or not. But the reincarceration is easily arguable as bullshit.

Welcome to federal minimum sentence guidelines. It's not just for meth heads and crack dealers.

(03-01-2016 05:31 PM)yakherder Wrote:  If their goal is to bring attention to the issue, they'd be better off as martyrs than as self proclaimed 3%ers occupying a cabin in the woods, so again just carpet bomb them and let the shit start flying. I'll grab that popcorn, turn on the news, and grin cynically Hobo

Where is Willie Wilson Goode when you need him.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
03-01-2016, 05:38 PM
RE: Terrorist Attack in Oregon
Minimum sentences I can deal with. Sorry, we fucked up, come back to jail, after you've already served the sentence you were given and returned to your life, is a different story.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2016, 06:13 PM
RE: Terrorist Attack in Oregon
I read somewhere in the local news that they had gone to jail for the federal minimum sentence, but the locals were not content with that due to the Oregon wildfire issues. Arson is one of the most despised crimes in the rural communities. It's not the feds who are sending them back to jail, but the locals. At least that is what I read here.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-01-2016, 06:17 PM
RE: Terrorist Attack in Oregon
(03-01-2016 05:38 PM)yakherder Wrote:  Minimum sentences I can deal with. Sorry, we fucked up, come back to jail, after you've already served the sentence you were given and returned to your life, is a different story.

The appellate court disagreed. The federales argued for the mandatory 5 year minimum at sentencing, they didn't fuck up. The judge ignored the mandatory minimum 'cause all the Hammonds really did was poach a few deer and tried to cover it up and lit a back fire to save their house and ranch from lightning wildfires. The federales appealed the sentences because "Hey. That ain't the law. Hammonds face the same time as if Homey lit up a national forest for fun." and won. And the Hammonds are fucked. They can blame Slick Willy for that and an activist judge who decided to challenge the law.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: