Why do you bother posting things in a thread like this to make yourself look like a raving lunatic so often ?
Maybe he's exploring a likely hole in the sieve of possibilities, while his logic for deducing how it unfolds has a slight flaw.
I don't think I've posted once on this thread, but it's suddenly 28 pages long.
You might also look at this as a cornpone example of a hold-out die-hard world-view, based on a puerile understanding (if any) of the Constitution and the historical basis for federal land holdings in states.
Excluding the original 13 exceptions, most of the states were federal territories before statehood. Whatever exchanges took place in passing lands between state and federal oversight, the old conservative principle applies: "There's no such thing as a free lunch."
In this and a pile of other examples, you have individuals short-changing the public of the compensation for reasonably land-use fees -- fees used to defray the cost of maintenance and management.
There's also another side to this. One would have to go back to the 18th century to see what presidents and the executive branch did regarding Shay's Rebellion, the Whiskey Rebellion and Fries' Rebellion.
These gun-toting hayseeds are being treated with kid gloves. Sooner or later, the work that goes on in the occupied building will need to proceed, the trespassers must be evicted, and charges filed.
And I could also take a line from the '90s film "Tombstone," and tell the looney-bird quixotic cuckoos of the bird-sanctuary: "Go ahead! Skin that smoke-wagon and go to work!"
As much as to say "Just try it. . . . "
Facebook
Twitter