Trespass and the law-Part 3


I am not sure if you know Ammon or not. You may have preconceived notions as most do that watch the news but I would like to ask that you place what you think you know aside as I try to make my point. I don’t want your thoughts about how you think you feel about Ammon to cloud the points I am trying to make. Perhaps after I explain it, you may see things just a bit differently.


I have followed Ammon since I first heard of him relating to the federal issue and it prompted me to learn more about other ranchers that had suffered the same fate that Ammon did. After even brief research it was easy to see things far beyond the media driven narrative relating to Ammon. To me, it was clear that there was a legitimate epidemic of continual federal abuse over the ranchers.


Sadly, if those in charge of making such judgement calls against him and others had a little knowledge of globalism and Agenda 21 and we could have overcome the media narrative. Inquiring minds wouldn’t be so compartmentalized by media believing this was some sort of isolated issue by some rogue “Right-Wing Extremist.” Instead, what they would have seen were God-Fearing American ranchers fighting to maintain control over their land and they may have also begun to see a dark conspiracy to remove these people from their land for profit or an environmentalist agenda or both…indeed both. In other words, the conspiracy that no one is talking about is the crux of the issue.


I was talking to Ammon Bundy one day about his arrest at the Capitol. Apparently, he was cited and/or detained several times. He says he was peaceful, as he always is and quiet and gave no reason to be charged with disturbing the peace which is probably why they couldn’t use that statute but they arrested him anyway. Why?


Ammon said they charged him with Trespassing. Out of several of these charges, he was once charged for sitting in a public chair in a public meeting room and disregarding the Directors orders. As I recall one time Ammon said he was surrounded by others and if true why then was he singled out and not any of the others? In my communication with law enforcement, it was because he was cited not to come back and he did. From all I have seen and all that I know, I believe strongly that this man, is still being singled out, continually harassed by the government with the sole purpose of trying to prevent others from rising up.


This man, mind you, that was harassed for years, incarcerated tortured and then let go after the government spent millions of tax payer dollars and because they couldn’t charge him? He is clearly a target even though he is an innocent man…in America. I believe he will never get anyone to hear him or redress his grievances because he challenged the government and made them look foolish. I also feel like he will also be seen by law enforcement as an Enemy of the State because law enforcement for the most part is trained to believe that any exercise of freedom that challenges their authority is some kind of extremism regardless of the temperament while challenging such authority.


I know many people in law enforcement that are my friends and although many of them are freedom people, any mention of Ammon can cause one of them to wince. It’s what happens when people get the wrong information or the information they receive is taken out of context. It also happens when people trust and believe what they are told rather than finding out the truth for themselves.


In all this, I don’t really blame law enforcement any more than I blame the citizens because we were derelict in our duty for decades and we allowed it to happen. This being said, it also isn’t to condemn officers, it is to point our that the issue isn’t men and women in uniform doing a job, it is to point out that it is a major systemic breakdown of a free state and that if we do not talk about it and do something about it, we will be living under a dictatorship.

Ammon sent me a letter regarding his Capitol arrest. It was a hand delivered trespass notice that stated the following:


“The Director of the Idaho Department of Administration has the control under Idaho Code sections 67-1602 to 1604 and 67-5709 over the properties below. I am writing to provide you with a notice that after consultation with the Governor Speaker Bedke and Pro-tem Hill, you are prohibited from appearing or otherwise being present at the Idaho Capitol” … The letter goes on to say that if he enters upon such property, he will be charged with criminal trespass under Idaho Code 18-7008. In my opinion, they didn’t even have the respect to cite the subsections of the statutes.

The letter goes on to say that he refused a “lawful order” of the legislature to vacate the premises for being “disruptive and impeding business of the primary uses of state facilities” and some language regarding violating the safety of the people here.


There are a few things that should be considered here. The Director is an unelected bureaucrat and has no “lawful” authority to enforce anything either by statutory delegation or not. Unelected Directors of an Administrative agency have no “lawful” law enforcement authority. In reading the laws I have cited below, you will find that the Director is purely administrative in that his lawfully delegated “control” duty was to maintain systems as property and not people and his function cannot lawfully include law enforcement capabilities. That is law enforcements job. It’s like saying the Governors secretary or the janitor has law enforcement authority.


Second, I would ask what the real reason was that they singled him out when he was surrounded by others acting peacefully? Third, does the government have the authority to discriminate or harass someone that is there peacefully then charge them with being disruptive? And does the government have the lawful authority to mandate that citizens comply with any order given by any public “officer? What about the citizens basic right of redress? Is that only by permission of the state? If so, when has the state become abusive and authoritarian and how can people exercise its lawful authority in holding government accountable?


We covered law in Principle earlier, Let’s look at the Constitutions in the following post. Note, for those that are going to challenge me on the foundations of the Constitution, We will not be discussing the de-facto and de-jure governments at this time although the debate is worth considering in the grand scheme of things.

22 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

  • White Facebook Icon

© 2019 TomMunds.com