philoshop

Plenty of populated areas around the country have tight restrictions on wood-burning appliances. It's dealt with at the local level because it's a local problem. Regulation and restriction at the Federal level is wrong.

"They woke me up for this?"

I'm not sure if Time Warner has changed their rules, but they supplied the cable that I put into my pre-existing trench, and did all the connections at no cost to me. The cable only had to be "underground". Mine is about 6 to 8" down. Two guys with a box-o-beer and a trenching shovel can do 300 feet before lunch.

Article 1, section 8, paragraph 17.

My stove is just slightly more than a campfire-in-a-box. :-]

The compliant stoves are expensive. About 5x more than my current stove. They're also very fussy to operate and typically require electricity because of on-board computers and such, stuff that can break. I went with wood heat because it's simple, and for me the wood is almost free.

Yes. Do you leave your furnace, boiler, or electric baseboard units on when you leave?

The establishment of the State of Oregon constituted a release of territorial control by the Federal government.

The EPA is already going after the wood-burners in the US. Incrementally for now, but there is an all-out ban in the works. My wood stove is my only source of heat. It's a PITA not being able to leave the house for more than a day, but it's nice to not get a gas bill every month.

Full disclosure: The info I get is from a friend of mine who is a 4th generation rancher in Idaho, just across the Oregon border. He has a number of friends and acquaintances in Oregon, and their concerns are very real. These folks are losing their livelihoods to an out-of-control Federal Government. Are these folks biased in their opinions? They most certainly are. Am I biased? I'm finding it difficult to not be biased, given the facts. It's not about "rancher welfare" or the maintenance of bird-watching sanctuaries. It's about a handful of people who wish to be kings, and a populace deciding whether they prefer servitude to citizenry.

If you owned land next to public land and the government decided to take your land so they could include it in their theirs and make it off-limits to you, how would you feel?

Armored vehicles, helicopter surveillance, and snipers at two different roadblocks for a "traffic stop"? The two vehicles were headed for a meeting in neighboring Grant County, the Sheriff of which had told the FBI in no uncertain terms that he would not go along with their actions and that they had no jurisdiction in his county. Finicum knew that if he made it past the roadblock and into Grant County he and his passengers would be safe. He didn't account for the second roadblock. Despite what you've probably heard there is a great deal of local support for what these folks are doing. Harney County residents are renewing their effort to oust the corrupt Sheriff Ward and Judge Grasty from their 'ruling' positions and calling on their Governor to take back control of their State land. People in neighboring Grant county are showing tremendous support for Harney county residents.

Again, there were other options available to the Feds. They chose to create a scenario where some form of violence was almost assured. When I first bought my property I had problems with raccoons. I put out a bait pile for a few nights and when there were a dozen or so coming in regularly I set up and killed one. The others never came back. I did it because I didn't want them on my property and I had to teach them a lesson. The Federal Government believes they have sent a message to The People of this country about who is in charge. I believe they've misjudged the situation.

You're missing the bigger picture. Why did the Federal Government feel it was necessary to put Finicum in that position in the first place? It wasn't their only option.

Ignore the troll Bubba.

Video, enhanced for closeup view. It tracks precisely with the FBI video, IME. https://www.metabunk.org/m/Finicum.html Seems to me like the man was shot before he reached for his gun, and was actually reaching for his first wound.

Thanks for the history lesson wildcat. I spent time with some Amish folk about 20 years ago showing them how to saw logs to get the best furniture lumber. A nice log properly quarter-sawn is worth 4 or 5 times as much as the same log flat-sawn. There was an ancient Cat diesel dozer rotting beside the building with a big belt attached. The dozer fired up, and every piece of machinery in the place was running. It was a little spooky. I leave machinery running all the time, but all the overhead belts took some getting used to. Does the Garcias in downtown Buffalo still have the belt-drive fans?

Is there a "don't feed the troll" button here?

I'm looking for it wildcat. It's not brand new. It was a BLM banquet having to do with internal promotions in rank. The people were laughing and cheering about how much land each employee had been able to seize from private ownership.

They weren't criminals until the Federal Government created the incident that made them criminals, and they didn't "seize" any government property, illegally or otherwise.

I don't know what kind of shop equipment was even available in the late 1800's, early 1900's. What was the Colt or Remington factory using in those days? I'm genuinely curious here if you have info. A barrel requires a fairly precise lathe, for sure, but could have been "outsourced" by the maker. Other than that; a forge and casting setup (maybe), a solid drill press with tooling, a good assortment of files and hand tools, and a lot of patience and skill.

Welcome aboard bobdun! Best of luck with 'yote hunting.

Everything about this was handled very poorly, on both sides of the issue, from day one. The occupiers made very poor choices as to time, location, logistics, method of protest, etc. Quite frankly, they underestimated their 'enemy', which is the all-powerful Federal Government and their paid propaganda arm that is the main stream media, and the segment of US society that truly believes the current Federal government to be beneficent in it's intent. The county sheriff and the local judge have their own little racket(?) going on and don't want to have any national scrutiny so they handed it off to the state. The Governor of Oregon wrote a letter to the FBI and the US Attorney General and gave them her blessing (actually begged them) to take control. The Federal Government came in and made very poor choices in their handling of the situation on every level. They could have very simply shut off access to the wildlife refuge and shut off all logistical supply to the occupiers. The occupiers would have gotten hungry and bored and would likely have left the area. This solution would not have been technically legal because it is, after all, a 'public' facility and the occupiers were committing no crime by being there other than refusing to leave, and birdwatchers would have been denied access to the property. The Federal Government could have chosen not to scare the hell out of the local population by presenting a militaristic show of force and instigating unrest in the nearest town. The Federal Government had a choice, early on, between peaceful resolution and violence. They did not choose peaceful resolution. That choice speaks volumes.

For me personally; the video, and the almost-immediate release of it, raises as many questions as it answers. In the end, the Federal Government has once again clearly demonstrated to The People precisely who is in charge of this country.

Happy Birthday Deerthug! It's my Dad's b-day as well.