Archive for americanmininglawforum.myfastforum.org mining, mining law, prospector, mining claim, 1865, 1866, 1872, legal, illegal, government, policy, administrative, mineral, grant, right, forest, service, BLM, DEQ, wild, scenic, hobby, gold, placer, hard, rock, hardrock, dredging, highbanking
 


       americanmininglawforum.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> General
daubster

5 million acre land grab

This a a site to discuss mining law.

Can someone tell me if this is legal.

Can the president really withdraw this land by executive order
without it being a matter of national security, military placement,
government building?

Bruce
GoldPatriot

It depends……..

If there is ANY adherence to the Constitution (which is certainly NOT the strong point of this administration), the President has NO such powers or authority.  

If there is no adherence to the Constitution, the King may do as he pleases.  

Even if President enlists his questionable authority under an “Executive Order”, as he has NO legal right or Constitutional authority to forcibly “Take” property without due process and the concurrence of the majority of Congress.  

Of course, if he is King……

“Can the president really withdraw this land by executive order without it being a matter of national security, military placement, government building?”  NO!!!  But left unchecked, a King can….

You must remember that all governments and their agencies work on a small number operational premises. some legal, but mostly illegal, with the basis of “extortion” as it‘s main driving logic.  Actually, the government operates on two active theories of “extortion”.  First is simple “extortion”, i.e.;  A person commits the crime of extortion if he knowingly obtains by threat, control over the property of another, with intent to deprive him of the property. The property extorted may be an item of property or a sum of money. Extortion is a felony in all states, except that a direct threat to harm the victim is usually treated as the crime of robbery. Extortion may be classified under different categories of seriousness depending on the degree of wrongful intent. Blackmail is a form of extortion in which the threat is to expose embarrassing, damaging information to family, friends or the public.  (a) A person commits extortion who uses coercion upon another person with the intent to:  (1) Obtain property, services, any advantage or immunity; or (2) Restrict unlawfully another's freedom of action.

The second active theory of “extortion” would be what is called, “Extortion Under Color of Official Right Law”, i.e.: Extortion under color of official right involves the obtaining of property from another under color of official right. It is the wrongful taking by a public officer of money or property not due to him or his office with or without force, threats, or use of fear.

Governments can not help themselves, for the very nature of the governing, is to continually seek additional powers it does not have, powers that the governed will not willfully grant, thus the government feels compelled to force the legal parameters and to always seek “encroachment” against freedom and liberty, regardless of it‘s mandate.  The one fact that can be found throughout history and on every continent, is that the government has never allow the governed to have true freedom and liberty, for it’s not to be found anywhere in the government DNA.  Not only is history replete with examples too numerous to list, but even our own Founding Fathers realized the sickness and addiction in a unbridled lust for power, necessarily leads to the “encroachment” and “violation” of our sovereign laws by government, against the rights and liberties of the governed, and thus, would be a perpetual contest between the two.  

As a result, our Founding Fathers created a whole new concept of government, never before seen is history, known as a “Limited Republic” and the tools to restrain it, known as the “Constitution and Bill of Rights“, also had never seen in history before.  

I believe it is important to understand that while our Founding Fathers placed a high benchmark for those that serve in the three branches of our government, as witnessed in the “Oath of Office”, each must take, they also knew that as long as government could cede power unto it’s self, a single reliance on the “Oath” and the “faithful obedience unto the Constitution and Bill of Rights, would always be more about a “goal”, than a practical fact of strict adherence and moral and ethical faithfulness to those two foundational documents, by those that would be elected and entrusted to do the people‘s business.  

Our Founding Fathers, for the first time in history, developed the Constitution and Bill of Rights based on two, not one single legal foundational basis.  The Founders respected the fact that to have “equity” in the laws of this land, two legal basis were required.  The first basis of law was held as the superior, being “Natural rights“, which are rights which are "natural" in the sense of "not artificial, not man-made", as in rights deriving from deontic logic, from human nature, or from the edicts of a god. They are universal; that is, they apply to all people, and do not derive from the laws of any specific society. They exist necessarily, inherently in every individual, and can't be taken away. For example, it has been argued that humans have a natural right to life.  They're called moral rights or inalienable rights.”  

The second basis of law, was held to be inferior, being “Legal rights, in contrast, are based on a society's customs, laws, statutes or actions by legislatures.  An example of a legal right is the right to vote of citizens. Citizenship, itself, is often considered as the basis for having legal rights, and has been defined as the "right to have rights". Legal rights are called civil rights or statutory rights and are culturally and politically relative since they depend on a specific societal context to have meaning.

Unfortunately, the totality of the fears of our Founding Fathers were too soon validated and continue to be even more exponentially troublesome, today.

“So, as a miner, how does the “taking” of land, either by legal or illegal means, effect me as a prospector or miner, the right to lay claim, or as a claim owner?”  Insofar as Congressional and Constitutional law allows, the simple “taking” of land, either by legal or illegal means, does not invalidate those Congressional and Constitutional laws that have been historically been upheld as the “law of the land”, via the consolidated 1872 mining laws that have traditionally protected the rights of citizens, miners and claim owners.  

But let us be very clear.  If the citizens, miners and or claim owners surrender their rights or opt to be continually terrorized by the forthcoming (as it has been in the past) harassment, duress, threats, fraud and other criminal acts, including blackmail, coercion and or extortion and fail to fight for their rights against the government, these rights will surly be nullified by appeasement and or capitulation.  

With every right, comes responsibility.  Part of that responsibility is to take any and all legal steps to keep your rights pure and unrestricted.  Learning the mining laws is not as easy as walking way for those responsibilities.  Sometimes, life isn’t fair, but we none the less have to take a knowledgeable stand and fight for our freedoms and liberties, each day of our lives.  For if we as individuals don’t care, who will?

       americanmininglawforum.myfastforum.org Forum Index -> General
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum
Home|Home|Home|Home|HomeHome|Home|Home|Home|Home