@this-one-time-at-bandcamp wrote:
It is readily apparent that the citizens of Burns, Oregon don't agree with you. A peaceful protest doesn't require the protestors be armed, and willing to kill "if provoked". Their seizing of Federal property was a provocation instigated by these very same ARMED thugs.
Oh, and I don't pay any attention to whom I am replying to, I just hit "reply" to the post above mine..........and if you can't determine the individuals I was referring to, that's your loss..........naming names generates "interpersonal dispute" sanctions.
Well at least you admit that you are "generating an interpersonal dispute". Of course you are.
No one in this thread stated the Hammonds shouldn't have been charged. For that matter, no one call it a "peaceful" protest, just a protest. Which so far...is peaceful.
What I objected to is the false misleading title of this thread...that is all.
Generate that, lol.
But lets take a closer look at your own words. You said Oregonians were progressive and imaginative. You also said Oregonians were among the most responsible gun owners in the Country...as if you're in a separate Country full of nothing but hi IQs and enlightened folks.
You also said there were no well armed militias. Sure...one mass killing and now this.
Tell me again what's so great about Oregon.
I do however agree with you on the imagination, lol.
I'll repeat, before you use my last points as a deflection tactic...The objection was to the completely inacurate title of this thread. No one agreed with what the militia is doing or what the Hammonds have done.
And at this point I might say something like, "nice try", but it wasn't. : )
