Posted on Jun 6, 2016
1
1
0
I'd rather see the question "Will some yahoos use guns to 'preserve their right' to destroy America's history?" answered.
For one thing, it's a whole lot easier to answer since the answer is "Yes.".
For one thing, it's a whole lot easier to answer since the answer is "Yes.".
A major Native American site is being looted. Will Obama risk armed conflict to save it?
Posted from chicagotribune.com
Archaeology
American History
Rights
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
1
1
0
This has been going on for 524 years. It is way past time to put an end to it. That site is very special to a large number of Native communities. It should be protected.
Those yahoos can find other places to screw up. Leave the sacred sites alone.
Those yahoos can find other places to screw up. Leave the sacred sites alone.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Agree with this move, but this is the problem as I see it.
President Barack Obama has seized more land for the federal government than any other president in American history. To date, he has unilaterally taken over 260 million acres of land and water, giving control and ownership over to the feds.
President Barack Obama has seized more land for the federal government than any other president in American history. To date, he has unilaterally taken over 260 million acres of land and water, giving control and ownership over to the feds.
(0)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
You are mixing politics with the preservation of antiquities. Much of that land has nothing to do with the intent of the law.
(0)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
You may note I said I agree with this confiscation of property. Have you ever reviewed the totality of government unused property. When land is grabbed, there is cost to maintain it and a loss of land available for state/ local tax revenues.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
MCPO Roger Collins - Master Chief; At law it is "the Government" that is the "owner" of ALL the land and all that "the People" have is a "use right" which is voidable whenever "the Government" decides to void it (in more progressive countries, "the Government" is required to pay fair compensation for the voiding of that "use right").
The issue is not so much "How much land can 'the Government' take?" but rather "Can 'the Government' take ANY land at all?". Once you have agreed to the principle that"the Government" CAN take land, then the amount of land that "the Government" takes is a mere detail (and subject to both interpretation and 'force majeure'.
The issue is not so much "How much land can 'the Government' take?" but rather "Can 'the Government' take ANY land at all?". Once you have agreed to the principle that"the Government" CAN take land, then the amount of land that "the Government" takes is a mere detail (and subject to both interpretation and 'force majeure'.
(0)
(0)
MCPO Roger Collins
EconomicPolicyJournal
"THURSDAY, APRIL 17, 2014
The Ugly Facts of Federal Government Land Ownership
There is no legitimate reason the government should own all this land. It should be auctioned off with the proceeds given to the people of the United States. Note well: The government has minute ownership of land in the area of the 13 original colonies. The founders of this country had no conception of massive government ownership of land."
Unfortunately, the courts have found that there are a number of ways to do a land grab for a variety of reasons. My little county is 53% owned by one or another federal agency or the state. We can not develop industry or jobs on a scale to provide more than basic first responders, either as volunteers or low paid county employees due to the land grabbed and resultant tax revenue loss. There is no doubt that the Founder's had this in mind for the citizens of the United States. It amazes me how the left can see this as a positive, but then many are supporting Bernie the Socialist. But those in the cities can occasionally visit and see the sites owned by the government, if they pay the price (fees) at the expense of the citizens of the states that the land was confiscated from.
"THURSDAY, APRIL 17, 2014
The Ugly Facts of Federal Government Land Ownership
There is no legitimate reason the government should own all this land. It should be auctioned off with the proceeds given to the people of the United States. Note well: The government has minute ownership of land in the area of the 13 original colonies. The founders of this country had no conception of massive government ownership of land."
Unfortunately, the courts have found that there are a number of ways to do a land grab for a variety of reasons. My little county is 53% owned by one or another federal agency or the state. We can not develop industry or jobs on a scale to provide more than basic first responders, either as volunteers or low paid county employees due to the land grabbed and resultant tax revenue loss. There is no doubt that the Founder's had this in mind for the citizens of the United States. It amazes me how the left can see this as a positive, but then many are supporting Bernie the Socialist. But those in the cities can occasionally visit and see the sites owned by the government, if they pay the price (fees) at the expense of the citizens of the states that the land was confiscated from.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google