LETTERS: Bundy, supporters selfishly put lives at risk

To the editor:

Of all the things that have been said and written about the Cliven Bundy story, I would add this: Mr. Bundy and his family seem not to mind a bit that their illegal and inflammatory actions escalated into a situation that easily could have led to the deaths of many people — law enforcement officers with families and other citizens with families.

I’ve seen the Bundy family interviewed many times, and they’ve never mentioned it. It’s not even on their warped radar. It’s astounding — and astoundingly selfish.



Like gang bangers

To the editor:

The groups surrounding the Bundy family can say they support the Constitution, shout patriotic slogans and sing the national anthem and “God Bless America” all they want. But they are not patriots who believe in the rule of law — unless it is their interpretation of the law. They are, in fact, thugs and bullies not unlike the inner-city gangs who attempt to control neighborhoods through fear and intimidation.

The only difference that I can see is that gang members can be sure that, if they point guns at law enforcement officers, they will be shot and killed or, if they survive, arrested and jailed.



Alternatives offered

To the editor:

Regarding Norman Nero’s April 17 letter to the editor, “Heck no”:

Someone please tell uninformed liberals that the GOP has introduced and passed several alternatives to the Affordable Care Act (with some Democrats voting yes, too). Mr. Nero and other less-informed voters and the sheep of the Democrat Party need to understand that it is our surly relic, Sen. Harry Reid, who is holding up the salvation for America’s health care woes. The GOP currently has yet another alternative to the Unaffordable Care Act called the American Health Care Reform Act, which would allow people to choose their own health care insurance through a series of tax deductions. Read up on it.



Constitution over chaos

To the editor:

I thought the Review-Journal was in favor of upholding the Constitution of the United States — until I read Sherman Frederick’s April 20 column (“From Brandeis to Bunkerville, free speech fragile”).

Mr. Frederick states “Like the civil rights activists of the 1960s, cowboys and patriots put themselves between the BLM and rancher Cliven Bundy’s cows.” Does Mr. Frederick know that Mr. Bundy has been to court on numerous occasions to fight against the BLM’s order for him to remove his cattle? Does Mr. Frederick know that Mr. Bundy has lost every court decision? It has taken years to go through the U.S. justice system, and still Mr. Bundy has lost.

Now, when the BLM attempts to enforce the law, backed by numerous court decisions, a group of armed “protesters” come ready to inflict harm on those government employees who are simply attempting to enforce the courts’ decisions. Patriots? I think not, Mr. Frederick. Mr. Bundy had his day in court; he lost. I find it unconscionable that Mr. Frederick, former publisher of the Review-Journal, would use his bully pulpit to praise a ragtag bunch of armed extremists who threaten the lives of ordinary citizens charged with enforcing the court decisions and the law of the land.

Would Mr. Frederick have been as enamored with these people had they shot and killed employees of the BLM? Would that certify them as “cowboys and patriots” then? What did he think they meant to do with those guns, anyway? I personally disagree with the court rulings, and I think the cattle and tortoises can live happily together as they have done for the hundred-plus years that the Bundy family has allowed cows to graze in our desert. But despite the fact that I am sympathetic to the plight of Mr. Bundy, I am in no way in favor of anyone pointing a loaded weapon at someone simply trying to do their job and enforcing a court decision. Anyone doing so is committing an act of domestic terrorism — period.




Comment section guidelines

The below comment section contains thoughts and opinions from users that in no way represent the views of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. This public platform is intended to provide a forum for users of reviewjournal.com to share ideas, express thoughtful opinions and carry the conversation beyond the article. Users must follow the guidelines under our Commenting Policy and are encouraged to use the moderation tools to help maintain civility and keep discussions on topic.

View Comments