/cyber/ - Cyberpunk & Science Fiction

http://archive.is/CC0Dt for those who aren't in the know

Nothing like some countryside-cyberpunk.

cnn says the woman believes in god. how are some angry rednecks cyberpunk related? do you have any info on why they're occupying that wildlife refuge?

>>39532

url shorteners are cancer btw. always post the original link too.

>>39536

>someone believes in god

>there can't be anything cyberpunk about them

*tips hololens*

Not that it's particularly cyberpunk in the first place, but you're looking at the wrong reasons.

non Burger here, what's all this shit about?

>>39559

Here we go:

In 1870, the Harney Basin is settled by ranchers. Over the years they become very successful, and are responsible for something like 300,000 cattle. They owe their success to a very well-planned irrigation system they made from the lake to improve the land.

In 1908, Roosevelt declared the land surrounding the lake an indian reservation, even though there were no indians living there. Later, the reservation became a wildlife refuge.

In 1944, the Hammonds bought a ranch in this area. 6000 acres of property, 4 grazing rights on public land, 3 water rights.

Over the years, the wildlife service expanded the refuge by buying more land. By 1970, they surrounded the Hammond Ranch, and were pressuring them to sell.

In the 70's, the wildlife service and the bureau of land management revoked grazing permits, forcing many ranchers to sell to them. They also raised the price of the permits for the ones they didn't revoke. They took over the irrigation system.

By the 80's, wildlife service was trying to get the Silvies' ranching land. When they refused, the refuge employees diverted water into a nearby lake. Within a couple years the lake surface area doubled, and 31 Silvie ranches were flooded, destroying homes, barns, graze land, etc. Now broke, they had no choice but to sell their land.

The water started to recede in 1989.

By the 90's, the Hammonds were one of the few ranchers left adjacent to the refuge. One of them researched why this was happening. She found a study done by wildlife services from 1975 finding that the wildlife actually preferred private land (because it was well-maintained and predators were kept out) over the public land (they had a no-use policy). Four times as many ducks and geese on the private property than on the refuge. Migrating birds 13 times more likely to land on private property than on the refuge. She asked the wildlife services about this, and the abuse began.

>>39578

Early 90's, the Hammonds got a deed for a water right from Oregon State. Land management and Wildlife Services got pissed and challenged them in court. The court ruled in favor of the Hammonds and the State of Oregon.

1994, land management and wildlife services illegally built a fence around the hammond's water source, even though they owned rights to that water. The hammonds tried to stop the fence being built, and the federal government had one of them arrested and charged with "disturbing and interfering with federal officials or federal contractors". He was released without bail and the judge never set a date for the hearing of the charges.

Wildlife services restricted access to parts of the hammond's own property. They had to go onto a road through the refuge to get to it, and they illegally barricaded that road. The road was later proven to be owned by the county, and not the federal government.

Land Management and Wildlife Services revoked the Hammond's grazing permit, gave no reason, court proceeding, or court ruling.

Due to fence-out laws not applying to fed, the hammonds were forced to either build and maintain miles of fences, or forget about the upper half of their property. They had to remove the cattle because they couldn't afford this.

Due to this, they had to sell their ranch and home so they could buy a different property that could feed their cattle. The property came with two grazing rights. The feds revoked those later too.

The original hammond ranch owner died, and the hammonds traded to get their ranch back.

In 2001, steven hammond called the fire department to warn them that he was doing a routine controlled burn on the ranch. The fire spread onto public land and burned 127 acres of grass. The hammonds put out the fire themselves.

In 2006, a lightning storm started multiple fires. To prevent the fire from burning down their winter grazing range and their house, steven decided to start a backfire. It worked well, and put out the lightning fires.

The next day, the feds filed a police report about the backfire. A few days later, land management asked steven to meet in town for coffee. When he left, he was arrested. His dad Dwight was also arrested. They were charged for a bunch of shit. When the county district attorney reviewed the case, he decided that the accusations didn't warrant prosecution, and dropped the charges.

>>39579

In 2011, they were accused of terrorism (for the same thing as before). Minimum sentencing of 5 years, max of death. They were slandered as arsonists all over the news.

Capital Press ran a story. Someone with the name "Greg Allum" three comments on the article, calling the ranchers “clowns” who endangered firefighters, etc. and burned valuable land. Greg Allum, retired land management employee called Capital Press to complain he had not made those comments. Capital Press removed the comments. The IP associated with the comments is from the land management office in Denver.

Allum commented about how land management hates them, and that they don't deserve this, and that they're going to lose more.

Land management stated that if they found one of their employees falsified the comments, then they wouldn't tell anyone about it.

In 2006, Dwight and Susan's home was raided. Allegedly they were looking for evidence to connect them to the fires. They didn't find anything. Steven still maintained that he started the backfires, and it worked well enough to put out the fire.

During proceedings, the Judge didn't allow certain evidence and testimonies. Example: The Judge didn't give time for the jury to hear scientific findings that the fires improved the health and productivity of the land. The hammonds were given 1 day to present their case, and the prosecution was given 6.

The feds found a mentally-ill hammond to testify. He testified that steven told him to start the fire. He was 13 at the time of the incident, and was 24 at the time of testimony.

The judge and prosecution selected a jury of people who didn't understand how ranches were run. All jurers were from pendleton - some were driving over 2 hours one way.

After 6 days of being pushed for a decision, the jurors (who knew nothing of ranching, and of the punishment) found them guilty of terrorism.

The judge overruled the minimum sentence of 5 years for terrorism, on the grounds that it would be a cruel and unusual punishment.

They were ordered to pay $400,000, dwight spent 4 months in prison and steven spent a year.

Remember, this is for burning 127 acres of grass.

>>39580

After serving their time, land management and the refuge filed to appeal the ruling to make sure they served the minimum 5 years.

In october 2015, they were resentenced to serve 5 years. Dwight will be 79 when he gets out (if he survives), and Steven has a wife and 3 children. Both of their wives will have to manage the ranches without them.

During proceedings, the hammonds were forced to give land management the first right of refusal, meaning if they ever sold their land, it would have to be to land management.

Dwight and Steven were ordered to commence their re-sentencing on the 4th of january.

Basically, the whole oregon thing was their friends, the bundy's getting pissed off about this whole ordeal.

Oh, and last I checked, they had paid half of the 400k. They were required to pay the rest by the ned of 2015. If they couldn't pay, they would have had to have sold their ranch to land management. Not sure what happened there.

>>39546

the fuck are you talking about?

no, blindly believing that some magical being whose existence is not proven and which contradicts a whole range of physical laws as well as being mathematically less likely than alternative explanations can tell you how to live your live or otherwise control you is not cyberpunk and such a person can never be any kind of punk.

>>39578

>>39579

>>39580

>>39581

ok so we ask "how are some angry rednecks cyberpunk" and you respond by posting your latest novel or whatever this is (not that I'm gonna read it).

congrats, you fail at communication.

>>39537

it's not being used as a shortener you dipshit

>>39588

>>39578

>>39579

>>39580

>>39581

Thanks niggs

>>39588

Maybe you should go back to Lainchan

>>39627

i didn't call him a bad person, i told him to not use url shorteners or to post the real link along with them.

what are you, retarded?

sage for off-topic.