Three pages.
I’ve been inundated with opinions on the legality, morality, and constitutionality of the Bunkerville, Nevada public lands standoff between the ranching family of Cliven Bundy and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the FBI, and other law enforcement agencies.
After listening to many opinions and perspectives I’m coming closer to drawing some conclusions. For starters, as a legal matter, Cliven Bundy doesn’t have a legal legal to stand on.
That doesn’t remotely mean that he’s wrong.
From the moment the ink was dry on the parchment creating it, the federal government has used, abused, and expanded its power into a grotesque mockery of what the Founders envisioned. The federal government was never supposed to occupy more land than it absolutely needed to function, much less control huge swathes of entire states. They have made their tyranny “legal” by passing laws and writing regulations, but legality is merely a concept… it doesn’t mean that laws stripping power from the citizenry are moral, or constitutional, or that we should blindly obey them.
More @ Bearing Arms
Rosa Parks didn't have a legal leg to stand on either. Sometimes moral right is all it takes.
ReplyDelete