Bundy family

Oregon Standoff Leader Ammon Bundy Is Running for Idaho Governor

His platform includes cutting almost all taxes and ending incarceration for non-violent crime.

|

Ammon Bundy, best known for leading the 2016 armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon, announced last weekend that he is running for Governor of Idaho.

"I'm running for Governor because I'm sick and tired of all of this political garbage," he states on his campaign website. "I'm tired of our freedoms being taken from us and I'm tired of the corruption that is rampant in our state Government."

Bundy has become something of a figurehead for rural ranchers skeptical of federal power. Prior to the month-long Oregon standoff in 2016, he and his father, Cliven Bundy, were involved in a 2014 cattle grazing standoff with the Bureau of Land Management in Nevada.

Since 2016, Ammon Bundy has continued to be a controversial and outspoken activist against government overreach. In 2018, Bundy released a video criticizing Trump's immigration crackdown and put out a call to sponsor refugee families. Last July, he made a video in support of Black Lives Matter and defunding the police, stating that "you patriots, if you really want to call yourselves that, somehow think that the law enforcement is your golden calf…There needs to be a defunding of government in general." 

Bundy was also arrested on trespassing charges last August after leading a protest at the Idaho statehouse against measures related to the COVID-19 pandemic.  

Bundy is now trying to work within the state government, rather than against it. 

"We cannot afford to have state leadership that lets the federal government bully us," said Bundy—who is running as a Republican—in a campaign video. "And it's an unfair fight when the federal government unlawfully attacks the people—believe me, I know, as my family and I experienced this first hand."

In another video on his campaign website, titled, "3 Lies the Mainstream Media Has Told You About Ammon Bundy," he denies that he is anti-government: "Think about it this way—if you don't eat poison, does it make you anti-food? If you don't do drugs, does it make you anti-medicine? And if I don't support government overreach nor the open, plain, and obvious corruption in government, does that make me anti-government or just anti-corruption? I think it's pretty obvious." 

Bundy's platform—called the "Keep Idaho IDAHO Plan"—says he would curb government overreach in almost every way imaginable. He advocates for the elimination of all property tax, personal income tax, and personal property tax for businesses, calling it "nothing more than legal plunder." The only kind of tax that he supports is a consumption tax. 

Bundy's platform also includes plans to take back Idaho's federally managed land, end restrictions on medical treatments, eliminate forced curricula in public schools, strip back gun control, and end state licensure for professions like hair styling. 

Criminal justice reform figures heavily in the Keep Idaho IDAHO plan. Bundy supports increasing accountability for police officers and ending civil asset forfeiture. He also supports ending the war on drugs by stopping the incarceration of drug users. 

"The propaganda machine has worked diligently for years to create a strange dichotomy as it pertains to Law Enforcement—either you love everything that all police officers do everywhere, no matter how illegal, unethical, or immoral it is—or you are 'anti-cop' and you hate the police," said Bundy in another video on his campaign site.

"I don't hate the police," Bundy continued. "I love and honor every honest police officer who executes his duties according to the Constitution and with the fear of God. Likewise, I detest any police officer who abuses his power, terrorizes innocent citizens, and violates peoples' rights simply because he can get away with it." 

To decrease incarceration rates, Bundy proposes Idaho enact "Restitution and Restoration Laws." He sees these as a better and more economical way to deal with non-violent crime:

It is simple, if someone steals your iPhone, it must be immediately returned to you along with a judgment in your favor for and an additional 20% of the value of it. That's it. It's simple. Restitution and restoration. If you're a victim of a non-violent crime, you get restored, plus 20%…There is no reason for us to incarcerate so many non-violent criminals.

Bundy was not available for comment.

NEXT: A Study Finds That Crash Injuries in 5 States Rose After They Legalized Marijuana Use but Not After They Allowed Marijuana Sales

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. O/T – Biden is giving quite the history lesson on the 2nd Amendment. Apparently even on the day it was signed it restricted the types of guns you could own. “You couldn’t buy a cannon”.

    …Actually, you could.

    1. Not only could you buy them, the idea was that the average citizen should be allowed to have similar armaments as the military.

      This is a problem with how 2A advocates negotiate, we shouldn’t be starting at “Let me keep my AR-15”, we should be starting at “I should be allowed to buy an F-22” and go from there.

      1. You can’t go full 2A without a WMD.

        1. I will trust my neighbor who has a family here in town and who has been stable for 50+ years with a nuke before I trust a fed with a spitwad.

          1. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
            on this page…..VISIT HERE

      2. Military aircraft are expensive to buy (for new ones) and maintain (for all eras). An operational F-22, including support crew, is out of reach for anybody but the top multi-billionaries. I’m not afraid of their being armed. Even Musk, who I wouldn’t trust with a sharp pair of scissors, couldn’t do any more damage than he could do with his current empire. But presumably the government would have negotiated exclusivity with the manufacturer if jet fighters had to be legal for civilians. A MiG-21 would be a better option. If you are well off, not Bezos class rich, and have military flying experience you would have a realistic chance of buying one, flying one, and getting a bomb or cannon shell on that gopher that’s been wrecking your lawn.

        1. Oh I know I can’t afford an F-22, that’s got nothing to do with my right to own one though.

          Gopher removal seems like something the A-10 would be better suited for. I do enjoy some commie rifles but I can’t read commie, so a cockpit in English would be preferred. Plus the GAU-8/A is extremely badass.

          1. Pulling the trigger in an A-10 costs you tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars per minute depending on which type of ammunition you use.

            1. Though the price might go down if the manufacturer was selling it to thousands (hundreds of thousands? millions?) of Americans instead of just a few governments…

        2. But I bet you could buy strategic insurance from a company that *could* afford a fleet of them.

    2. As I recall, the war of 1812 was partly won by raiding British ships from privately owned warships, the equivalent of a destroyer at the time.

      Privateers they were called and they served our nation well.

      American law enforcement is a Sheriff, not police. When the Sheriff calls you to serve you must be able to bring with you a modern, military capable rifle.

      Police are a progressive lie. Just watch. Next we will see a call for the nationalization of all police.. The thin blue line was created to fail at just this time.

      1. Privateers were around for a very long time. Too bad nobody issues letters of marque and reprisal anymore.

        Most privateers were not well-armed, and had a very short life expectancy if they stumbled across a ship of the line. But if you were successful, you could end up with a very capable ship.

        1. “Too bad nobody issues letters of marque and reprisal anymore.”

          The US Congress still has the authority to do so if they wanted to.

          1. I remember reading a novel from around the late 1990s in which Congress used a letter of marque to bypass a president who refused to do the needful. The politicians realized many pages after I did that such a resolution was subject to veto, but got around it somehow.

            1. I just read Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution and it says nothing about the President signing such letters. Specifically says Congress can grant letters.

          2. Whatever happened to that story about Russia offering just that on US servicemembers?

            1. The same thing that happens with 70% of MSM/Reason OUTRAGEOUS stories… turned out to be false and/or completely made up

      2. Do you really want Cletus down the way deciding what is and isn’t justice? Just take your own next-door neighbor, whoever it is. Are they equipped to deliver on constitutional rights when a crime occurs? We can’t even get trained cops to do that.

        1. I’d trust them over, say…you.

          1. If I were your neighbor, you’d have to, under this brilliant little scheme.

      3. And while Federal troops fled Washington to let it burn, the good and honorable citizens of Baltimore and the surrounding counties stood firm, and said “fuck you, hon, you ain’t doin’ that shit here” *pronounced in an Essex accent*.

    3. Jill Biden did the research for that speech.

    4. Not only could you buy one, you could buy a ship to mount it on and get paid by the government to commerce raid for it.

    5. We as a nation have become obsessed with prisons (i.e., known as the incarceration nation with 5% of world’s population and 25% of world’s incarcerated). We have now deemed non-contact and non-violent offenses as violent and nobody seems to see a problem with that.

      I wanted to take a brief moment to introduce our nationwide grassroots family advocacy organization. Women Against Registry advocates for the families who have loved ones required to register.

      There are over 917,000 men, women and children (as young as 8 and 10 in some states) required to register. The “crimes” range from urinating in public (indecent exposure), sexting, incest, mooning, exposure, false accusations by a soon-to-be ex-wife, angry girlfriend, or spiteful student, viewing abusive OR suggestive images of anyone 18 years old or younger, playing doctor, voyeurism, prostitution, solicitation, Romeo and Juliet consensual sexual dating relationships, rape, endangering the welfare of a child, the old bait-n-switch internet stings (taking sometimes 12 months before a person steps over the line) guys on the autism spectrum or with intellectual disabilities and many others.

      Multiply that number by 2 or 3 family members you can clearly see there are well over 3 million wives, children, moms, aunts, girlfriends, grandmothers and other family members who experience the collateral damage of being murdered, harassed, threatened, children beaten, have signs placed in their yards, homes set on fire, vehicles damaged, asked to leave their churches and other organizations, children passed over for educational opportunities, have flyers distributed around their neighborhood, wives lose their jobs when someone learns they are married to a registrant. Academics and researchers indicate 3 things are needed for successful reintegration; a job, a place to live and a “positive” support system. Banning a registered citizen from drug treatment centers is not positive support.

      The Supreme Court’s Crucial Mistake About Sexual Crime Statistics – ‘Frightening and High’ (Debunks the high recidivism rate cited by retired SCOTUS Justice Kennedy and current Chief Justice Roberts)

      It is very important that you read the abstract below and then the full 12-page essay by Ira Mark and Tara Ellman.

      ABSTRACT This brief essay reveals that the sources relied upon by the Supreme Court in Smith v. Doe, a heavily cited constitutional decision on sexual offense registries, in fact provide no support at all for the facts about re-offense rates that the Court treats as central to its constitutional conclusions. This misreading of the social science was abetted in part by the Solicitor General’s misrepresentations in the amicus brief it filed in this case. The false “facts” stated in the opinion have since been relied upon repeatedly by other courts in their own constitutional decisions, thus infecting an entire field of law as well as policy-making by legislative bodies. Recent decisions by the Pennsylvania and California supreme courts establish principles that would support major judicial reforms of sexual offense registries, if they were applied to the facts. This paper appeared in Constitutional Commentary Fall, 2015. (Google Frightening and High)

      A study reviewing sex crimes as reported to police revealed that:
      a) 93% of child sexual abuse victims knew their abuser;
      b) 34.2% were family members;
      c) 58.7% were acquaintances;
      d) Only 7% of the perpetrators of child victims were strangers;
      e) 40% of sexual assaults take place in the victim’s own home;
      f) 20% take place in the home of a friend, neighbor or relative (Jill Levenson, PhD, Lynn University)
      There is a tremendous need to fund programs like “Stop It Now” that teaches parents how to begin and maintain a dialog with their children to intervene before harm occurs and about grooming behaviors as well as other things at age-appropriate levels in their Circles of Safety.

      Our question to the public is one of, when does redemption begin? Ever? When are human beings required to register given their lives back without the stigma and hate?

      We support the principles of Restorative/Transformative Justice; restore the victim, offender AND community. Unfortunately, our justice systems, federal and some states prefer to annihilate human beings using mandatory minimum sentences, leaving our families destitute for years or decades and call that justice. Institutionalization is counter-productive to what we pretend to be doing.

      Our country is evidently proud to be ‘the incarceration nation’ with 5% of the world’s population and 25% of the world’s incarcerated.

      Here is an example of how our families are harmed. A well-meaning teacher printed out profile pictures of local registrants and put them on the board around the classroom. She promoted her effort to protect her students by suggesting they look at and remember those people. One student pointed at one picture and said, “Katie isn’t that your dad?” It was….

  2. It is simple, if someone steals your iPhone, it must be immediately returned to you along with a judgment in your favor for and an additional 20% of the value of it. That’s it. It’s simple. Restitution and restoration. If you’re a victim of a non-violent crime, you get restored, plus 20%

    And if they don’t have the 20%, they can just steal it from someone else? I see a lot of problems with this idea.

    1. I know people with cannons.

      1. I’m sure there are people out there with Gatling guns in their possession, too.

        Biden’s speech was so bad even Geraldo was bashing him.

        1. I don’t think even the ATF considers Gatling guns to be automatic.

          1. Yet, wait till Biden’s child burner gets in charge and you’ll be lucky if a cap gun isn’t an NFA item.

          2. They aren’t; they are powered by that crank, which counts as a trigger. One turn (10 degrees?), one round.

        2. Lol you watch Geraldo.

    2. Enforcement of restitution against the impoverished is a no-win situation. But that doesn’t mean the law shouldn’t start with restitution and deal with inability to pay separately.

    3. Let them work it off then.

      Who knows, it might lead to a skill, job and a better life.

      1. Have you ever tried to enforce restitution on the impoverished? It’s an endless cycle of court appearances and no shows and token partial payback and more court appearances and … Sooner or later you either decide to jail them instead of invoking restitution or just give up.

        Does that mean we should start by giving up or start by going straight to jail? No. But it does mean that there’s some reality here that requires a finer touch.

      2. Probationers here in Georgia clear brush from the roadside, pick up trash, etc. Restitution folks could do that too.

    4. I had similar thoughts. My libertopia replaces the 20% with all costs associated with convicting you — court costs, time off work, police, investigators, everything which would not have been spent absent the crime — and if you didn’t pay within some reasonable time, say 30 days, you were an outlaw — you could not file any complaints for less than what you owed, meaning your victim, and anybody else, could legally steal from you for lesser amounts. Of course you could sell your claim, and whoever bought it could tack on whatever additional recovery charges they incurred. Keep it up long enough, live a life of crime without paying outlaw debt would mean not being able to file charges even for being kidnapped and locked up; or ultimately killed. And no, it doesn’t mean the rich could literally get away with murder, because it would make them proven public threats, and the slightest twitch would encourage legitimately-perceived self-defense.

      No idea how practical it would be, but it at least acknowledged the problem. Too many people think writing laws is the answer, and never consider the ultimate enforcement is death by cop.

      1. Too many people think writing laws is the answer, and never consider the ultimate enforcement is death by cop.
        Because people don’t perceive the state to be an adversary whose existence devolves to serving its own interests.

      2. Sounds like a good way to punish the poor for being poor and go on punishing them and impoverishing them for it. Poor people with rights: the Koch brother’s worst nightmare.

        1. Nope, just the opposite. If you have a good case against someone rich, person or company, you are bound to attract hungry lawyers, and because restitution includes all recovery costs, the victim and the lawyers all get full recovery. The rich, whether people or businesses, are much more likely to pay up rather than be declared outlaws and have the public steal them blind.

          The rich, on the other hand, have little incentive to sue the poor, for exactly the same reasons.

          Next time your open your yap, let the knee-jerk anti-liberty spam pass, then engage your brain and try thinking a bit.

          1. “you are bound to”

            Let’s keep a lid on the assumptions.

            There’s never been a day in history where the poor got better lawyers than the rich.

            1. You may be right on that except for Tort cases.

            2. You mean I keep a lid on my assumptions while you speculate wildly.

              Fuck off, ignoramus. How about YOU try responding to my actual message? Oh wait, you can’t; I rebutted you and you have no answer.

              Fuck off, slaver.

  3. John McAfee appears to have committed suicide rather than face tax evasion charges in the U.S.

    “John McAfee, the antivirus software pioneer who founded cybersecurity company McAfee, was found dead Wednesday in a jail cell in Spain, according to a statement from his attorney.

    A Spanish court earlier in the day ordered for the extradition of Mr. McAfee in connection with a federal criminal proceeding in Tennessee. Mr. McAfee had been detained in the country since October in connection with criminal charges filed in Tennessee by the Justice Department’s tax division.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/john-mcafee-antivirus-software-creator-found-dead-in-spanish-jail-11624482910?

    1. He should have gone to France. Or Russia.

    2. Terrible. RIP. Brutal ass “justice system”.

    3. Wow, that’s awful.

    4. I didn’t know he knew the Clintons – – – – – –

      1. He didn’t hang himself!

        1. Shot himself seven times with a bolt action rifle.

        2. Yeah, if there wasn’t a hammock and a prostitute involved, it probably wasn’t how he wanted to go.

    5. Epstein’d? In a k-hole or the like?

      Wow.

    6. Hey guys, can we hold off on all the McAfee jokes until Brian Doherty posts the article about his death? We are gonna blow our wads early, and McAfee wouldn’t like that. In the meantime, head over to the reddit thread, which is fucking hilarious.

  4. Didn’t know he had so many libertarian-sounding positions.

    What the article doesn’t go into enough is what a self-centered jerk the guy is, and how poorly he plays with others. He would make a terrible governor, unable to work with anyone.

    1. Sounds like you, but with some semblance of value otherwise.

    2. …so he’s a libertarian.

  5. Since 2016, Ammon Bundy has continued to be a controversial and outspoken activist against government overreach.

    So Bundy is a libertarian who eschews cocktail parties.

  6. Huh, his platform sounds rather libertarian.
    Too bad he’s a nut.

    1. I doubt he would stick to his libertarian platform with any show of principle.

      1. I am not “up” on this guy. Not fully informed. The article here makes him sound like my kind of libertarian, right down the line!

        Y’all have any good links on his asshole side? (I know we all have one if we are honest. How LARGE is his asshole side?)

        Thanks!

    2. Is that it? Ad hominem? You’re usually better than that.

    3. Is he a nut or just runs afoul of your left sensibilities and the authoritarian leftist media you idolize?

  7. More good news from SCOTUS:

    “Supreme Court sides with California farms in case involving labor union access”
    […]
    “…In a 6-3 decision, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court’s conservative majority effectively struck down a California regulation that had given labor organizers a right to access private farm property up to three hours a day, 120 days per year, to meet with workers when they are off the clock….”
    https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/supreme-court-rules-case-involving-labor-union-access/story?id=78182783

    Private property is private property; set up your tent out there.

    1. Excellent news!

    2. I feel you but how does a state get away with their criminal laws which make all sorts of demands on property and my body?

      1. You’re a socialist – so its ‘our property, and ‘our body’ there, Comrade.

    3. “Victoria Hassid, chair of the California Labor Relations Board, which defended the regulation before the Supreme Court, said her office is now considering potential workarounds that could allow union organizers to continue accessing farm property.”
      Those racist justices are no match for the workarounds. The Supremes tell Colorado they can’t force a guy to make a gay cake. Colorado says fine, we’ll force him to make a tranny cake instead. Does anybody really believe California is done here?

  8. Biden’s comment today that you’d need an F-15 and nukes to go up against him. Ok so when can we get those?

    More seriously, does he not realize that we lost to the Taliban and they didn’t have F-15s or nukes?

    Also also does he really think anyone here would pick the US military as the first target? I think the guy is mentally deranged and knows absolutely nothing about asymmetric warfare.

    But he clearly got the numbers in and his previous crime and voting positions are being trashed, so the dems did a 180. They know 2022 is going to be an election ass kicking.

    1. Getting an F-15 might be tough. The Air Force probably isn’t going to give them up, and Boeing probably can’t build you one without federal permission.

      I suggest building your own 5th generation fighter. I don’t know of any rules against it.

      1. I’m still working out how to build my own Youtube…

        1. Check out PeerTube.

      2. F-15’s shouldn’t be that hard. There are multiple air forces across the world that field them and the USAF doesn’t even field the most advance versions (yet – they’re buying them).

    2. He’s also further reiterating that the left/government/oligarchy see the American people as enemies and subjects.
      But hey, keep doing nothing because it totes can’t happen here…

    3. “Biden’s comment today that you’d need an F-15 and nukes to go up against him.”

      Then why were they so scared of Trump voters wandering around with zip ties at the capitol?

  9. Smart move on his part. Many conservatives don’t have a problem with sedition and treason anymore so his crap at the bird refuge shouldn’t hurt him.

    He’s also Mormon and there are lots of Mormons in Idaho.

    1. lol… treason is living by every word in the U.S. Constitution…
      Ya; You’re completely Nazified.

      1. Naah, just a run of the mill lefty asshole (flagged)

      2. Insurrection against the federal government is in the constitution?

        We really shouldn’t be calling our fellow citizens Nazis and fascists.

        The problem is many of the Trump worshippers are fascist traitors. They don’t think elections should matter. At least if they don’t win.

        1. Insurrection against the federal government is in the constitution?

          Well; It is exactly the result of Insurrection against a monarchy Government (i.e. The Revolutionary War) so I wouldn’t be so gleeful about writing it off against a National Socialist (def; Nazi) federal government.

          That governing going on that violates the people’s Supreme Law over it.

          What really should matter is election integrity.

  10. “Idaho’s federally managed land”
    Now there’s a trick…
    Is that like MY ‘federally’ managed income and labor?
    Or is that like MY ‘federally’ managed healthcare plan?
    Or is that like MY ‘federally’ managed vehicle?
    Or is that like MY ‘federally’ managed house?

    I guess so long as it’s marked as mine the feds can use guns to keep me completely away from it.

    I’d vote for Bundy entirely because of the Nazism going on in DC though I think he’d be better positioned as a U.S. Representative.

  11. I like how the media describes him as “Far Right”.

    Which might be fair. I’m still waiting for one politician to be described by the press as “far left”. But alas, you can go left, left left left left left left sort of… forever, and it’s never far, and there’s definitely no gulag at the end of it.

    1. Well he is far right. He’s not a left-libertarian is he? Clearly over by the right-libertarian quadrant corner. I know, people on this site pretend left-libertarian doesn’t exist.

      1. Leftism is collectivist, so yea – you can’t value liberty if you’re collectivist.

        1. Left-libertarianism does not advocate the state owning the means of production. But then again neither do progressives. I guess you just need to maintain that fantasy to reconcile being a fascist who thinks he’s a libertarian.

          1. Oh no; STEALING the means of production, shutting-it-down completely, or funneling stolen money to it certainly wouldn’t be ‘owning’ it.. /s No Never! /s

            “So long as the property has someone else’s name on it the Gov-Guns can do whatever they want with it”, every lefty who likes to pretend they are not a Nazi.

            I guess you just need to maintain that fantasy to reconcile being a Nazi who thinks he’s a libertarian.

  12. Around early 2020 I listened to interviews with the Libertarians who wanted the party nomination for President. You had the normal politicians like Lincoln Chafee. You had the total nutjobs who had no clue and no plan but to snap their fingers and make the government disappear. And you had some folks in the middle, with ideas but no experience, like the one who ended up being nominated. Bundy is another from the middle ground. He has a platform and a vision. He doesn’t have the experience or the temperament. But you could do worse.

    1. Thankfully, the LP is receiving an enema in the form of the Mises Caucus, and things are already changing.

      1. Sounds like a Southern Comfort enema, and there isn’t a worse kind.

        1. All enemas are great. Had some of my partners choke me as they filled my bowels with the hot stuff. Fucking bliss, man.

  13. I detest any police officer who abuses his power, terrorizes innocent citizens, and violates peoples’ rights simply because he can get away with it.”

    FAR RIGHT!

  14. The Idaho Republicans have no interest in this guy whatsoever and claim he’s not a Republican or even registered to vote in Idaho.
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/idaho-republican-party-says-ammon-bundy-is-not-welcome/ar-AAKIiDu

    1. This is why the Republicans always lose in the past, present, and future. Radicalism, perceived or not, pushes the debate and viewpoints. The left does this very well, and that’s why they’re winning.

    2. Trump shook the foundation of the established political class. Others will be taken more seriously and will be subject to more attacks.

  15. From the sound of it, Bundy’s platform is pretty much textbook libertarianism. And his arguments are reasonable, measured and consistent. And yet for some reason, he’s “a nut”, “a self-centered jerk” who “doesn’t play well with others.

    1. See the links I posted above. Ella Lubell didn’t tell us everything about the guy.

      1. So, your big reveal against him is that he didn’t put on a face diaper like a good little subject.

        ERMIGAAAADDD!!!!1ELEVENTY!!!

        #libertariansforfollowingorders

  16. I like some of what I’m hearing. Finally, an antigovernment extremist with some principles. Politics should do away with that in swift fashion.

  17. Prison is an abomination. The American criminal so-called justice system is an endless nightmare. More incarcerations than shithole dictatorships by far. More than anyone. Thanks in no small part to Nancy Reagan’s fucking astrologer or whatever the fuck those buck-toothed crypto-fascist moral ninnies thought they were doing.

    Imprisonment should be a specific tool for specifically dangerous criminals. I have read a lot of books on moral philosophy, and I am no libertarian, but I can’t figure out how it can be justified for the state to punish anyone.

    If you have read books on justice, though, you’ll know that what satisfies it varies from culture to culture. There is no correct justice. But that’s also why we are free to make up a better one than we have.

    It’s gonna take some deep breaths before you can handle the true scope of the libertarian affront that is American criminal so-called justice. And I’m not even talking about the dubious value of the state bringing bodily harm to people for the crime of violating “property,” a thing we made up out of thin air. We’ll leave that aside.

    No politician who says we have to collectively murder people so we feel better about ourselves needs to have such power. That is a vile, apelike thing to believe. If it is doing society some good to punish people, up to and including ending their life, rather than simply making them pay their debt to society or get rehabilitated, then that’s not a society worth celebrating. A society with bloodlust as an essential component. Keep it on the football field, that’s what it’s there for.

    1. No politician who says we have to collectively murder people so we feel better about ourselves needs to have such power. That is a vile, apelike thing to believe

      And yet, your side of the political spectrum clings to it as if it were the finest of prizes. Murdering the aged, the infirm, the bourgeoisie, the Jewish, the black, the politicaly divergent–all in the name of ‘what’s best’.

      You are sickening, disgusting people. And yet, you persist, without calls for your wholesale slaughter being issued by politicians, academia and the media– perhaps because, they are just like you.

      1. You better concentrate us in some camps then, just in case.

        1. You better concentrate us in some camps then, just in case.

          That’s how you do things, Tony. WE stop you.

          And you WILL be stopped.

          Again.

    2. My reason for opposing the death penalty is much simpler. I don’t trust the legal system with that kind of power. It is corrupt and they make many mistakes. Forensics is often bullshit. At least if you are in prison you have the possibility of overturning a conviction and it does happen.

    3. Actually prisons came about as a more humane alternative to some of the more gruesome methods used in the past.

      The problem here is we have too many people locked up for things that either should not be crimes, or should not require imprisonment.

      1. There are countries with prisons that more resemble spas than dystopian hellholes, yet America has much more violent crime than those places.

  18. I agree with much that Bundy says, and the image of the Feds being forced to impotently retreat from the Bundy ranch is a perfectly iconic American image.

    Credit where due given, he is worryingly populist rather than ideological.

    1. The retreat of the feds gets some credit. They were in a no win situation. There was no second Waco. Good choice.

      There is an old Yiddish proverb “Besser a shlechta sholom bi a guten krieg” a bad peace is better than a good war.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.