Would it kill you?
This requires additional context:
LaVoy Finicum, who was reaching for his gun after leading law enforcement on a high speed pursuit. You're welcome to listen to the conspiracy theorists on youtube saying the gun found was planted on him, but I encourage you to watch the
recording and decide for yourself.
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, the same man that evaluated and recommended the shrinking of Bears Ears by 85%, has
had several controversial actions as Secretary of the Interior.
The Hammonds were actually charged for several things.
They were charged with setting five fires: Hardie-Hammond, Fir Creek, Lower Bridge Creek, Krumbo Butte, and Granddad. In order to get a plea deal, the prosecutors dropped three of them, including one that burned 46,523 acres of BLM managed land and 12,334 acres of private land. I'm not sure where the figure less than $1000 is coming from, but I'm having a hard time taking that at face value.
This line right here seems to at least partially infer that wilderness has, and always has needed to be managed by a well-managed, educated governing body. Overgrowth is natural, and so are "wild" fires. It does not need a governing body, nor set of rules to maintain itself. It's a part of the natural cycle of our planet. This is probably the single most over-sensationalized, poorly rationalized line of thinking in the federal lands/state lands/private lands debate. We seem to need to have both a governing body making good, educated policies, and need less of a governing body at the same time?
Can you see how this more than likely is interpreted as "I need my government, not a government" sentiment?
OK.
This is the kind of response I am actually "trolling" for, if I am trolling in here.
You have a reasoned line of thought, a lot of information.... some of it "new" to me, and you lay it out quite nicely, I would say "nicely" as in with good manners, a high degree of civility.
At a recent political gathering, there was a cowboy sort.... judging by his garb... with a "Justice for LaVoy" Tee. In these parts so far as I've seen, there is a very significant unbalanced sentiment in LaVoy's favor. Almost everyone believes he was gunned down.... shot in the back, first....by the shooter in the woods behind him. He reached down to his gunshot wound near his waist. As I watched that video, I saw the shooter from behind point his rifle, and I saw the recoil of that rifle,s shot. just seconds before LaVoy reached down. And the wound he had in that area, was a shot from behind him.
I have not seen the coroner's report myself. But it would not be the first time coroner made up a false report if it doesn't say that. The video makes the case in my view. In a Utah case, in the late 1970s, cops shot John Singer in the back as he was walking away from them. A few years later, working at the University of Utah Medical Center, I worked a few doors down the hall from the room where John Singer's body was examined. And I heard some stories...… But the Governor weighed in on the case and gave orders.
Look, law enforcement is necessary..... and the people who do it are mostly decent. Sometimes the bad apple is the front line guy..... but sometimes the bad apple in the politically-connected guy.
I have stopped by at a city park rally in a farming town where an organized effort was going on to help raise funds for such "Justice". A lot of people stopping by..... almost everybody.
I have watched the available videos many times. There is a wrongful death lawsuit in the courts. We can see what we want to see, I'm sure. I'm sure the claims of both sides will get a lot of close examination. I am not sure we will ever actually know for sure.
I have not gone over the Hammonds' court proceedings. I related the account published by the Western Livestock Journal, which I subscribe to.
In my neighborhood, I have realized that many people see me as a pro-BLM oddball. I have never quibbled with anyone in the BLM or Forest Service over anything. Before I came along, the locals actively resisted the "management" of the guvmint. In regard to an irrigation structure, one Forest Service man tried to tell the locals how the work had to be done. When he came to check up on them, he encountered about twenty locals with their guns out. He decided to turn around and let them do it their way.
But I believe public lands should be managed locally, by county jurisdictions under State laws. Nice if the Fed guv can put together some really good information and research to help the locals see better how to do. And, I say "No" to Agenda 21 as a way to run the world.
In nature, I see diversity as necessary to ensure survival.... I mean the use of differing methods..... a sort of experimental laboratory sort of thing, where people with new ideas can try stuff on a small scale. If it works, if it can be shown or proven to be effective and address public concerns, others will try it, where it looks like a good idea.
I am a sort of rebel about centralized authority, overall. But I will consider....will seek.... the help of authorities with knowledge or plans that have merit.
Whatever else you can say about Zinke.... political wonk or whatever..... he was out there in the public trying to get action to prevent the horrid California fires from being the "future" of California. I have been all over California, and I see the signs people put up in protest.... "Graze it..... Log it.... Or Watch it Burn." Zinke got the message out like this...."If you subscribe to five newspapers, and bring them in every day, and stack them in your house, and never take them out.... your house will one day burn." He says forests can sustain, in a healthy way, a certain number of trees per acre.... if you let more than that grow, the trees suck out the available water, then go dry, and get infested with beetles because there's not enough sap, and the trees become a serious fire risk....
I call "local" wisdom like that "good management"...… Locals have the sense to remove undergrowth by grazing or collecting firewood, and thin the forests with some degree of concern for safety and the health of the woods. I wish we did not have detached intellectual theorists with quite so many arguments against it.... Not to say I wouldn't actually want to know what their arguments or reasons are.
Within the past month, I discussed the fires with a Californian whose home was in the line of one of the fires in the past several years. Her home was the only home in her area that was not destroyed by that fire. When I attempted to elicit her views about organizing to get "authorities" to take action, she quickly cut me off.
"Well, you really just have to take care of yourself. We chose to build our home with fire-resistant materials.... stone and tile. We cleared out the underbrush around our yard, cut down some trees, made a fire break at our property line. Anybody can do that. Everybody should."
We need to get the federal regulations out of our way so we can do what needs doing. Or..... well.... hopefully..... just make the regulations fit the need.
