A video of a drunk, belligerent asshole being drunk and belligerent...you'll need to do better than that if you want to paint all of the protesters in the same light.
You asked for a citation, and I gave you one. You can flail and mewl and try to move the goal posts, but the fact is that he threatened to kill the police. See, bright eyes, when you are brandishing weapons, the threat is implicit. Your idiot hero who got shot stated over and again that he wouldn't be taken alive. If you weren't an idiot, you could parse from those words that he intended to fight it out. With his gun. So your gibberish is just nonsense.
Text can't scream.
You serious want to now delve into whether using all caps isn't perceived as screaming? Did your inbred heroes threaten anyone? Yes, they did. Deal with it.
Me saying you don't know something about a topic isn't an argument.
Glad to hear that you concede that all the time you have spent saying that to everyone here was just you braying like a jackass. Baby steps.
Show me the "force" by the protesters, show me how they all want to kill cops. Once you have that evidence, then we can have the conversation. But until then, I'll allow you to keep making up your own facts to support your already weak position.
I swear to God my tiny niece could put up a better argument than you do here.
You want me to show you the force? What the fuck do you call guns, moron? What the fuck were they ultimately charged with, genius? What did the dead leader repeatedly state, idiot? He said that he wouldn't be taken alive over and over again, while brandishing a fucking gun. Anyone else on Earth but you can understand what an implied threat is, apparently. When they are ultimately convicted for using force, maybe then the penny will drop for you.
Nope. I think that if Oregon ranchers got a permit from the state of Oregon to use land, they have a right to use that land. Which is what happened.
That is federal land, so the state can't hand it out. Welcome to Earth.
You DO realize that the land surrounding the Hammond's is not the same as a public park, right? It's called "Federal Land" because it represents land that is 25,000 acres or more.
No, idiot, it is called "Federal Land" because it is federally owned. Good fucking grief.
In the 80's Oregon newspapers reported that within that very same wildlife reservation, researchers were "stunned" that birds were not migrating to the area. Turns out, they were migrating to private lands being used by ranchers. So what did the Fed do? revoked grazing rights, revoked water rights for grazing, and went over state law to buy out and force ranchers off the land -- which the government already owned 80% of.
Hahaha! So in other words, the ranchers sold their land and still want to profit off of it. If the big evil gubmint "went over state law", then surely your heroes would have a case in court, right? Your problem is apparently that you don't understand how either the law or the government works. Mystified that there isn't mass support for your 'cause' among your fellow Americans? Here's a clue: nobody cares because it is all about demanding the right to make private profit from public land.
You don't know the legal history of the Hammond's, you don't know the history of land purchases in Oregon, you don't know the history and expansion of the wildlife reservation near the Hammond's land, you don't know basic grazing practices of protecting land from fires, you don't even know Oregon laws that allowed the ranchers to have their cattle grazed where they did.
It is all in the public record, goober. What you are missing is that just about everyone you have argued with here has already acquainted themselves with the facts around the situation, and have different opinions than you do.
You're not wrong because you have a different opinion, you're wrong because you're uninformed.
Having endured trying to communicate with you here, I have zero confidence in your ability to parse the facts in any meaningful way, yet I showed you enough respect to dignify your "argument". You can rant and bray all you want, but you haven't brought anything to the table that wasn't already there. With the facts at hand, I can see that perhaps ranchers have some sort of genuine grievance. How they decided to air it is where the problems started.