Cliven Bundy all along has agreed to pay grazing fees to the state. He just doesn't agree to pay it to the Federal government. It also doesn't make sense to him to agree to something that is really intended to regulate him out of business.

I'm not anti-govt. I'm pro- limited government, just as the founders intended. What we have now is actually more so what the original settlers were escaping from and fought back into submission. I'm not going to take the side of an out of control government that spends more money than it's "owed" on an attempt to collect said debt. Doing it at gun point and stealing personal property, no less. No, I can't support that.

Do you pay your taxes? Then he should as well.. Do you get to choose who to pay?

If you don't like the law, fight it in court... well I guess he did that and lost...

And while we're at the issue of cost, it costs more to keep people in jail than the cost of their crime, so we should release all prisoners?

We're not that far off, I just don't believe that I get to choose what the definition of limited is and neither should you nor Mr Bundy

Personal property was forfeited when he broke the law...

He should pay up what he owes... it's just a sorry excuse for squatting

They should have put a lien on the cattle and taken him to court. Why they didn't is the question. Maybe they are wrong and would lose.

What the Bundy thing comes down to for me is that people made a stand, in which I'm glad for that. I believe actions such as this and the education coming from it are valuable to potential adjustments being made in a peaceful manner to our current state of government.

It's also risky. I understand that as well.

Why they did it was to set an example...

I'm not sure it was called for either, but Mr Bundy needs to pay what he owes the govt... and stop using my land and your lands, it's not his... or did you give up your rights to the land to Mr Bundy?

I don't think Bundy is out there running you off the land if you want to go use it. It doesn't make sense to me that something can't be worked out with him so he can continue his productive use of it. That's not the intention of the Feds and is why he is the last Rancher left.

The BLM has been forcing farmers out of business by continuing to reduce head on their herds every time they renew use lease. Bundy was the last standing in the area and finally said ENOUGH. He was willing and attempted to pay use fees to the local gov but would not continue to reduce herd size each time he went to renew with BLM. Good for him for standing up to the MFs that continue to put ranchers out of business only to sell/long term lease the land, for pennies on the dollar, a few years later to the evil land grabbing fucks like Harry Reid and/or green energy companies that have politicians in their pockets.

you sure he'll be ok if we build a gun range on public land? and they won't drive dirt bike riders and ATV's from the land if they run through the cattle herds? also ever gone by one of these places and smell the stench? it's there..

what the feds intent may be different, but still I don't get the idea that he gets to use public land for his private use.. he has every right to support his farm on his own property but obviously his business model relies on using public land for private enterprise...

what does harry reid and et al have to do with this? if it's public land, the govt should be able to do what they want with it...

why doesn't Mr Bundy go and lease public land? pay full price for it not just a use fee --- of course it's not profitable,

even if the land was leased to Reid for pennies on the dollar, still a lot better than the zero dollars we are getting from Mr. Bundy...

I get that this is his way of life, but he based his way of life on the benevolence of the govt and that govt is no longer being benevolent... and that's the govt.'s right to be so... I don't agree with it, but I'm not the govt either...

Are you aware that nobody can use this land? The BLM and federal "public" land in general closure rate across the country is alarming and there are many public officials like senators, representatives, county commissioners, sheriffs, police chiefs, mayors , and even former state and federal land use folks strongly in opposition of what is happening

I think you need to dig a little deeper into the whole land use issue and understand Cliven Bundy and cattlemen in general are the latest "abuser" the BLM and USFS are using as the scapegoat. In the 70s it was oil & gas. In the 80s it was logging. In the 90s it was off roaders. In the 00s it was 'well that didnt work better make it all off limits' and wilderness areas expanded by leaps and bounds. In 2014, now that the family farmer/rancher--wealthy or otherwise--is not the token 'you poor baby' of the American sheeple population they are now next in line and Bundy happens to be one of the more colorful characters in the process. He is far from the only one.

Just declare squatter's rights. Works for some low lifes moving into unoccupied houses.

With complicated issues such as this that include a land grant treaty dating over a 150 years ago, verbal agreements, communal agreements, thousands and thousands of acres, water rights, improvements, and a limited family tree that looks like this http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin ... id=I549063 , I am sure glad we have the MSM and BLM to sort this out with an honest hand and the peoples best interest at heart.

XDM - something tells me the stench from Bundy's cattle aren't an issue in the desert of middle nowhere. Look up a birdseye view of Gold Butte Rd, Clark Nevada. http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?q ... ORM=HDRSC4

I'm too lazy at the moment to get you an exact address, but the Bundy ranch is the adjacent property above the more developed one (the bundy ranch is the one with all the junk everywhere, not the property with tennis courts and a pool) you see just about 1.5 miles South West of Riverside/170. Look around at the area. I think if we want, we could go out there and build a shooting range and ride ATV's without being a nuisance. Not a lot going on, it doesn't seem like ;)

Only way to know for sure though is to try. Personally I've only played the golf courses out that way (Wolf Creek is pretty cool with all the elevated boxes and cliffs) and never ventured out to get dirty in the vast desert, well besides eating some dust exploring the Grand Canyon anyways. I'm sure you probably know from experience as well that the desert in Nevada is barren wasteland for the most part. I can't get too enthusiastic about running a man and his family out of business when all he really wants is to raise cattle and melons like he has for years without harm. It appears the community supports him as well. I think it's safe to assume the FEDS don't have their best interests in mind.

I'm referring to the stench if I was to camp there...

Just because nobody is using it doesn't mean it's his property...

And the Bundy didn't own this ranch for hundreds of years

Still goes back to public property use for private profit...

You're not using your backyard everyday, can somebody move in and use it those days? That's what this amounts to