Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLaw cited against Oregon occupation was created to corral Civil War secessionists
The 154-year-old law under which Ammon Bundy and others were arrested this week was created to deal with a nation torn apart by war.
But it made sense for the armed occupiers who holed up at Oregon's Malheur National Wildlife Refuge to be charged under the Civil-War era statute, experts say, because like the Confederates, the occupiers rejected federal power.
...
The seven men and one woman worked together to control federal property and intended to impede federal officials who work on the refuge from doing their jobs, according to the criminal complaint filed by prosecutors. The refuge belongs to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
While used in the last few decades mostly against radical activists like Bundy, the charge originated at a time when entire states rejected federal power.
...
The beliefs and actions that led to the arrest of Bundy and his alleged co-conspirators parallel those of the era that gave the law life, Blight said.
"Bundy and that crowd are sort of latter-day secessionists," he said, because they've demanded federal land be handed over to local control.
The charge against Bundy and at least seven other arrestees stems from the fact that most of them were armed and threatened violence, according to their criminal complaint, preventing 16 federal employees from going to work.
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/01/charge_against_refuge_occupier.html
But it made sense for the armed occupiers who holed up at Oregon's Malheur National Wildlife Refuge to be charged under the Civil-War era statute, experts say, because like the Confederates, the occupiers rejected federal power.
...
The seven men and one woman worked together to control federal property and intended to impede federal officials who work on the refuge from doing their jobs, according to the criminal complaint filed by prosecutors. The refuge belongs to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
While used in the last few decades mostly against radical activists like Bundy, the charge originated at a time when entire states rejected federal power.
...
The beliefs and actions that led to the arrest of Bundy and his alleged co-conspirators parallel those of the era that gave the law life, Blight said.
"Bundy and that crowd are sort of latter-day secessionists," he said, because they've demanded federal land be handed over to local control.
The charge against Bundy and at least seven other arrestees stems from the fact that most of them were armed and threatened violence, according to their criminal complaint, preventing 16 federal employees from going to work.
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/01/charge_against_refuge_occupier.html
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
7 replies, 858 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (8)
ReplyReply to this post
7 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Law cited against Oregon occupation was created to corral Civil War secessionists (Original Post)
phantom power
Jan 2016
OP
I could live with 6 years from the current charges. But there's likely to be more.
phantom power
Jan 2016
#2
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)1. I read the charges. It fits "domestic terrorism" guidelines
which I believe was written in the last 15 years.
phantom power
(25,966 posts)2. I could live with 6 years from the current charges. But there's likely to be more.
Bigmack
(8,020 posts)5. There had BEST be more! Destruction of Govt. Property... firearms stuff... etc. nt
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)7. No it does not since it does not terrify people
but it does fit armed sedition, which carries 20 as a max.
PoiBoy
(1,542 posts)3. Some more info on the history of the law...
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/01/felony_charge_against_refuge_o.html
I hope these criminals are held accountable for much more that just this charge... IMO, if these folks are let off with a very light sentence or even probation, if would only serve to embolden others.
I hope these criminals are held accountable for much more that just this charge... IMO, if these folks are let off with a very light sentence or even probation, if would only serve to embolden others.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)4. I'll be darned.....thanks. n/t
Bigmack
(8,020 posts)6. Any mandatory minimum sentences on this stuff? nt