Rancher Bundy's Blunder? Or Advantage Liberty?

Many have seen the drama unfold in Nevada as a good ole standoff ensued this past week.  The cause is a Rancher Cliven Bundy and the cattle he has allowed to graze on Federal land, managed by the Bureau of Land Management. 

Now let us back up a bit; according to the article : Armed Right-Wing Militia Members Descend On Nevada To Help Rancher Defy Court Order by Ian Millhiser of ThinkProgess.com: "This conflict arises out of rancher Cliven Bundy’s many years of illegally grazing his cattle on federal lands. In 1998, a federal court ordered Bundy to cease grazing his livestock on an area of federal land known as the Bunkerville Allotment, and required him to pay the federal government $200 per day per head of cattle remaining on federal lands. Around the time it issued this order, the court also commented that “[t]he government has shown commendable restraint in allowing this trespass to continue for so long without impounding Bundy’s livestock.” Fifteen years later, Bundy continued to defy this court order."

Now I want to put this into some perspective.  Mr. Bundy has about 300 head of cattle.  If we simply do the math from 1998 to 2013, Mr. Bundy owes the feds $60,000 a day x 15 years (5,475 days) = $328,500,000!  What is even more fascinating is the Feds waited Fifteen years to collect on the court order.  Notice I said collect, not enforce. 

You see, you must understand how the federal government work.  They are nit-picky and they are bullies; nit-picky in who they go after and a bully for their harassing nature.  For example IF the Federal government in 1999 slapped Mr. Bundy with a fine and enforced the ruling, I doubt most people would have been  bothered by it.  Mr. Bundy broke a law, continued breaking it and was punished in a reasonable amount of time.  However, the Federal Government did not do that.  They wait nearly 16 years to choose to make Mr. Bundy pay up and as leverage, threaten to confiscate his cattle.  Now some might still wonder: Well Travis he was breaking the law, it was only right, he deserved this.  To that I wish to enlighten you.  Since the days of monarchs, a government is viewed to have a parental role, which is partially correct.  A Government can be a good parent or a bad parent and can drive it's children to wrath, Biblically speaking.   Anyone who has children knows that making threats is no way to have your children take you seriously.  Those that later understand that and then try to punish their children usually have kids that despise them.  I know this is overly simplistic, but here is my point: if our Federal government  wishes for us to respect them, then they should not do things to spite us or anger us, the people.

It has also been raised that the militia members and Mr. Bundy's claim of the unconstitutionality of the BLM's approach is unfounded, citing Article 4, Section 3, clause 2 of the US Constitution which reads in part:  “[t]he Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States." Great point, and certainly no one is questioning whether this is federal land or not.  The question is whether Federal land is to be treated as public or private property, concerning land rights.  Now you might be thinking: "Whoa! What about Yellowstone! Yosemite! etc" Those are national parks, that are preserved under the National Historic Preservation Act. However the Bunkerville Allotment is not a National park, a prehistoric site, grounds of a landmark, claimed by native Americans as a ancestral site, or a "site of Antiquity" (think Williamsburg, VA).  So who's land is it anyway?

This brings me to my second and final point.  This land is our land, not the government's land; We are a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.  The Allotment is NOT private property, nor will you and I go see the acres of brush, it is the people's property.  The oxymoron that the federal Government wants to fine Mr. Bundy is amazing; he has paid taxes to the IRS, allegedly this goes to maintaining this land in the BLM's budget.  Not to mention the amount of this fine borders breaking the 8th Amendment by imposing excessive fines.  Also the notion that this is our land is not socialism, as we are using land all ready belonging too the people.  Socialism is taking private land and giving it to everyone.   In short, Mr. Bundy was using land that belonged to him by proxy and if the Feds do not want it used, they can put a fence on it.

In conclusion, when the Federal government refuses to enforce it's own rules and when it does confiscates property and chooses when it will enforce it becomes a matter of liberty.  When the Federal government uses land  that serves no distinct purpose and denies access to the very people who pay for it, it becomes tyranny.  That is why the Feds backed down, because in the weights of justice, it did not have a case.  Long live liberty!