The Oregon standoff: Let’s not jump to conclusions

Sadly, the activist occupation of a wildlife refuge in Oregon turned deadly last night, with one of the occupiers killed and one injured during a law enforcement traffic stop that resulted in the arrest of the leaders of the group.  Of course, there were immediate claims from ‘eye-witnesses’ that the authorities had ‘murdered’ the dead man by shooting him while his hands were up and he was trying to surrender.  Unfortunately, those ‘eye-witnesses’ were themselves members or supporters of the activist group.  That automatically means that their comments alone, unsupported by any hard evidence, cannot be accepted prima facie as unbiased or objective.  They may be true;  they may not.  We simply don’t know for sure.

Inevitably, in high-profile, high-pressure, emotionally charged situations like this, there will be attempts made to manipulate facts, events and perceptions.  This is true of both sides.  The ‘official’ line will be that they acted against ‘lawbreakers’ and ‘scofflaws’.  The activist line is that they acted against ‘jackbooted thugs’ or ‘unconstitutional overreach by government’, or something of the kind.  Both sides’ declarations must be taken with a substantial pinch of salt.  After the events at Ruby Ridge and Waco, one certainly can’t unreservedly accept the Federal government’s explanations without solid confirmatory evidence (such as, for example, that provided by dash or body cameras);  and given that the Hammond family in Oregon have publicly stated that they did not ask the activists to become involved in their case, and the latter do not speak for them, we certainly can’t accept the activists’ perspective as Gospel truth either.  As far as the principals of the original problem are concerned, they’re unwanted intruders, seeking to turn an unrelated matter into publicity for their cause.

At this time, we simply don’t know the truth of what happened last night.  Until we do – and until confirmatory evidence is available, one way or the other – it’s important not to overreact.  Rushing to judgment will serve only to inflame the situation.



  1. One thing I find suspicious that have been stated is that the FBI was involved in a "traffic stop" – since when does the FBI conduct traffic stops?

  2. There is a lot about this incident that doesn't smell right objectively, independent of claims from either side. I am praying there is video from the scene showing the shooting was justified, things are likely to get ugly otherwise.

  3. I fear the first thing I thought when I heard the news was "Oh no, this sounds like Ruby Ridge." It may not be anything like, it may be that the Feds were completely in the right, but as poorly as they've been talking to people, and (IMHO) as poorly as they reacted to this from the get-go, it's going to look bad.


  4. Given what is being reported about the Waco biker shootout, an FBI/LEO assassination certainly seems like a possibility. The Federal/governmental credibility can hardly get much lower.

  5. We NEVER WILL know the truth then, because I don't think any government employee could be expected to be honest in this day and age. Remember that the protesters "stormed" the empty building, according to the Suck_ss news media.

  6. In this age of transparency (remember Obama promised us the most transparent administration ever)isn't it odd that the FBI is not releasing details nor video footage; then again neither has any other LE agency or department that was involved.

  7. Whether we approve of the occupation or not, the "authorities" screwed up by getting itchy. Bundy and Co. were starting to soften, it could have been a matter of waiting them out, and ending it peacefully. But no.
    Does ANYONE reading this believe the Feds would pull a roadblock/ambush like this, planned in advance, without clearance from up the foodchain? Meaning the DOJ, or the White House. If we don't see dash cam footage of this shooting, (and the longer it takes to show, the more tampering is likely)the more suspect it becomes.
    As's James Westley Rowles put it, "You don't deliver arrest warrants at 3,025 fps."…..

  8. One thing we do know for sure:
    The federal government reacted completely differently to Libertarian protesters occupying an empty building in the middle of nowhere than it did to Leftist protesters occupying urban parks (in the case of Occupy) or rioting through cities (in the case of Black Lives Matter, WTO protests protests against the Republican National Convention, etc.)

    Make of that what you will.

  9. The first rule of occupying is don't leave the compound to drive to another town!

    If Bundy is typical of the Three Percent, it might be better to just turn our guns in.


  10. Bundy and crew where lured into a kill box. One of the fed snipers might have gone off early as the one kia was a head shot on a man who had his arms up. He might have raised them quickly but it sounds like someone wants a civil war NOW. Find out every fed that lives in your town. That information could be golden soon.

    Remember, we out number them.

  11. @Paul: Who says so? That information hasn't been confirmed by anyone that I know of. It's rumor, not necessarily fact – so why spread rumors?

  12. I'm getting frustrated by the conclusions people are jumping to. So many people are rushing in to support these people, agreeing with all the nonsensical rumors, even when they're contradictory, without stopping to think that there's more to the story than 'guys standing up to government and get shot'. But meh, I guess imagining a scene like something from the plot of a videogame is much more interesting and lets people feel that they're on the right side of an incident that probably only has two wrong sides. If the rumors get any worse I'm going to have to take a break from a bunch of sites I normally enjoy. Too many people are going off the deep end over this.

  13. Bottom line, there is no possible way that everything that went down was not captured on video, not with Federal LEO involvement. Currently that video is evidence from a crime scene. At some point in the not too distant future it should be forthcoming. If it's not, well that in and of itself will tell us much.
    Until we see credible evidence it's all just he said she said and the only prudent course of action is to wait and see.

  14. Video has been released. Seems to be from a helicopter or arial drone. Very doubtful it was the government's.
    The rancher clearly had his hands up, and was not moving towards the police.
    Shots were fired by both policemen in the frame. (Who were stupid enough to be occupying each other's field of fire.)
    It was murder.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *