Why can't they charge the Bundys with treason?

[leftyladyfrommo]

Seems to me that their anti government stance along with an attempted armed takeover of government lands is about as close to treason as you can get.

[hack89]

1. Because it does not meet the constitutional definition of treason

treason has a very limited and well defined meaning in America. It is the only definition in the Constitution.

[razorman]

6. True. It is a serious charge, and must meet certain criteria.

Besides, none of us here will live long enough to see anyone ever charged with treason, just as we will never see war officially declared again. Our culture has become too sensitive to say such things out loud, even though people are actually committing treason, and we actually do fight wars.

[melm00se]

2. the potential crime

you are searching for is "seditious conspiracy"

[leftyladyfrommo]

3. That will work.

20 years is a long time to think about it.

[melm00se]

5. Of course there is

some potential conflict with the 1st amendment here.

[hobbit709]

4. Don't dignify their stupidity with a charge at that level.

[longship]

7. Because treason is specifically defined in the US Constitution.

And what these idiots did does not fulfill the definition of treason.

It's in Article III, Section 3:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

Hope that clarifies things for you.

[Nye Bevan]

8. "As close to treason as you can get"?

So closer than, for example, telling an enemy during wartime about planned troop movements?

[1939]

9. Should the Native Americans

who took over Alcatraz some years back have been charged with treason?

Should the student protesters who did strongarmed takeovers of administrative facilities in publicly owned universities have been charged with treason?

[leftyladyfrommo]

15. Were they armed to the teeth?

Picket signs aren't the same as arms.

I don't remember that they were carrying guns.

[1939]

16. Without regard to bearing arms

Those takeovers of government facilities were by force.

[hollowdweller]

20. Not sure that's the same thing. The Bundy folks were seeking to set up a separate gov't

They wanted to permanently change title of the land and set up their own gov't rather than getting the gov't to change.

[ileus]

10. Did they reveal some government secrets?

If only all squatters could be executed...

[NCjack]

11. Being felons who can't possess firearms will be hell for them.

[-none]

17. Do you really think that will stop them?

They will wrap themselves in the 2nd Amendment and claim they are a militia.

[Bluenorthwest]

21. And be arrested for it. Last month they were legally allowed those firearms, after conviction they

will be committing a crime by simply having those firearms. Please remember they are all in jail right now having recently wrapped themselves up in the Constitution.

[-none]

23. They are ranchers, ranching in the boonies.

They will have their guns. Just not in the gun racks in their pick-ups.

[linuxman]

12. Because it's not treason

[TipTok]

13. That's not how the law works...

Not even close...

[NaturalHigh]

14. Close but no cigar.

It's a very narrow legal definition.

[Glassunion]

18. It is not treason. However I'm thinking they should be charged with a "Seditious Conspiracy"

[GummyBearz]

19. Because treason is well defined

I'm sure there are millions of right wing fanatics that would want Obama charged with treason for something or another. But the definition is clear, and its not based on left wing vs. right wing.

[beevul]

24. Anti-government?

Nobody but an anarchist is actually anti-government.

They're not anarchists as far as I know. Its kind of hard to be an anarchist, and support the second amendment at the same time.