Jury acquits leaders of Oregon standoff of federal charges

[rushmc 23]

Well go figure.


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/10/27/jury-acquits-all-defendants-in-oregon-wildlife-refuge-standoff.html

another trial in AZ to come yet.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[gowlerk 2,275]

In other news, there seems to be some arrests in South Dakota. I wonder how those people will do at trial.

Quote

another trial in AZ to come yet.

The other trial is actually in Nevada. You often seem to have a hard time with simple facts, but I'm here to help.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[rushmc 23]

gowlerk

In other news, there seems to be some arrests in South Dakota. I wonder how those people will do at trial.

IMO
They should just be removed and not go to trial.

But we need to remember this is what we get when people pay attention to eco alarmists

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[pchapman 279]

The key early paragraph is this:

Quote

A jury found brothers Ammon and Ryan Bundy not guilty of possessing a firearm in a federal facility and conspiring to impede federal workers from their jobs at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, 300 miles southeast of Portland where the trial took place. Five co-defendants also were tried one or both of the charges.

That is indeed interesting.

(So what happened to the other five? It doesn't say.)

The article at the end mentions this:

Quote

Authorities had charged 26 occupiers with conspiracy. Eleven pleaded guilty, and another had the charge dropped. Seven defendants chose not to be tried at this time. Their trial is scheduled to begin Feb. 14.

So there's more to be heard from all this, just what the acquittals and those 11 guilty pleas really mean.

But at first glance it does seem to suggest they were OK to take guns to a federal facility because (a) it's acceptable to use a thread against the law, to prevent oneself being arrested, and (b) those silly little rules, equivalent to "No food on the premises" are unimportant compared to the more compelling argument that one was doing a sit-in. Little different than hippies in the '60s, but with more guns.

Obviously further news will clarify the situation more.

[gowlerk 2,275]

Quote

So there's more to be heard from all this, just what the acquittals and those 11 guilty pleas really mean.

But at first glance it does seem to suggest they were OK to take guns to a federal facility because (a) it's acceptable to use a thread against the law, to prevent oneself being arrested, and (b) those silly little rules, equivalent to "No food on the premises" are unimportant compared to the more compelling argument that one was doing a sit-in. Little different than hippies in the '60s, but with more guns.

Obviously further news will clarify the situation more.

Other stories have stated all the defendants in this trial were acquitted. Both sides were surprised by this. It's simply a case of a jury refusing to convict. It does not make new law or set any kind of precedent. But it may encourage others to think they can do similar things with impunity.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.