Support the American Indians Free Roaming Act?

[lightbulb27]

American Indian lands were stolen from them by way of illegal wars. Battle of Little Big Horn is just one example of the illegal murder of innocent women and children. Note Custers troops first shots specifically targeted women and children...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Little_Bighorn

I won't get into how biological warefare was used and how they were pushed onto reservations.

This Act enables American Indians to roam the lands that were there's before being taken, while retaining property rights for those whom think they own those lands via the govt that stole them in the first place.

Tenants: Shared usage of space with property rights to "owners" but free roaming to Indians.

* American Indians (at least 5% AI), are permitted to roam freely through all states, hunting and gathering as they find items. Provisions provided to limit damage to farmers and homeowners lands

* Buffalos and animals can roam freely about and be hunted without cost. They may not sell such items, only preserve and consume.

* No obstructions are permitted except for Govt military installations. Any fences should be electronic

* areas within vast areas, plant and pick what they wish in designated areas. Buffalo can roam freely and they can hunt them, with no cost/taxes.

* Indian campgrounds and state parks are provided for setting up TP's for overnight stays.

* Indians are to avoid waking up sleeping homeowners and making noise at night.

been "Indians visited recently, was fun hanging out with them...

"Oh honey, the Indians are doing a pow wow in the back yard, this is so awsome..."

At minimum, this should be done through 1/3 of the West.

Yes, in concept

No, I want to keep the land someone else stole that Im living on

Not relevant to me

[Flatmanlewis]

I believe two things can be true at the same time. Did the US in its history shit all over the Native Americans who lived here? Yes. I believe that. I also believe the myth of peaceful Indian tribes who were only disrupted with the arrival of the white man is a gross oversimplification. Native tribes committed open warfare on each other for generations - each ‘stealing’ land and resources from one another. All land of all peoples belonged to someone before it was ‘theirs’. This is true of everybody from the Aztecs, to the Zulu, to the Chinese, to the modern US. It’s an inevitable part of human history. Do we need to freeze on some timeline the specific people who were “most” entitled that land? No. I don’t think so. Land and people are conquered, displaced, and absorbed all through human history. It’s just the way it is. We do not usually owe them for their ancestors land, yet, I also recognize wrong is wrong and there should be some privileges afforded to our Native tribes. Free roaming may be problematic but I’d say such things as being exempt from all taxes, free government services such as licenses and tuition, and a return of any federal or state lands to their tribes is a good start.

[lightbulb27]

A very thoughtful and reasonable reply, thank you for that! I agree, they were not peaceloving people but waring tribes for the most part. Thus the value of a central power, the Fed Govt.
I'd find it a hoot to have well behaved and mannered Indians on horseback roaming our area. We could have real Thanksgivings like the old days.
Not everyone is well behaved though. The issue I see is they were crushed and put onto unproductive lands. If they are nomadic, it's how they are wired... so be it. Could do this on large tracts of land in Montana and Wyoming and California.

[Flatmanlewis]

I think that, sadly, modern American society is not well structured to adapt to nomadic peoples. Not saying it should be that way, just that it’s not really an idea I think would take flight without a lot of problems.

[Flatmanlewis]

Thanks for the good question!

[lightbulb27]

yes the whole "fence" and a dog thing is part of our culture training vs open lands. Welcome!

[Avicenna]

I'm not sure what the most appropriate way would be to deal with this historical legacy; however, violating the property rights of current landowners certainly isn't the answer. And the courts would likely be clogged with legal cases resulting from such a law and its implementation.

[DextroShade]

So they should be allowed to trespass on private property because of their race? This is blatantly racist and unconstitutional. If they want to roam they should do what the Eastern Band Cherokee did and buy their land back.

[lightbulb27]

That's a great idea actually. But kinda weird they are murdered off their lands at low prices to buy it back at high prices.
But then again, that is wall street...
Good thoughts, thank you!

[exitseven]

No. They can move around the country but they cannot trespass on my property. Who makes up this crap anyway? All this happened a long time ago. They should try to stop being victims,..

[lightbulb27]

One might think AOC, but I made it up after reading about General Custers attack and inspired by the Palestinian/Israel conflict. I'm surprised Harvard hasn't come up with it yet.
As I note elsewhere, it's not much different than Bears and coyotes. They have free roaming rights with some minor restrictions on behavior.
Your compromise is a reasonable starting point for dense populations. Out West, open lands, seems more viable to roam.

[Juxtapose]

Dude they LOST and were conquered. Losers don't get to make demands and land changes hands regularly throughout history. l

[madhatters4]

so their rights didn't matter? don't pretend you are some warrior for freedoms and rights when you do so on a purely selective basis. it's genocide what happened to native americans. bio warfare, trail of tears, mass murder, violated legal agreements, conversion schools.

[lightbulb27]

That's simply saying whomever is more powerful can take of the other. That's not very civilized.
I could play a lot of what if's...
It seems not much different to me than the wild animals that roam around my area. they live there, it generally is not a problem and they hunt and kill each other. If they don't want to be part of the USA (e. g. go to school, get job, pay taxes to the big guy, die in a white building), then they have an alternative like their old lifestyle minus the scalping, waring and endless fighting for resources.

[Juxtapose]

Pretty much any piece of land you stand on has changed hands so many times that you could have a whole bunch of people playing victim at any given time.

The Indians conquered other tribes too and would have done the same to us if given the chance. Drop the self righteousness.

[madhatters4]

drop the b. s. speculation. what they did was genocide. america negotiated deals and re-neged on it. america put kids in coversion schools. they put natives in reservations (effectively internment camps).

you select your outrage which makes your arguments entirely disingenuous. we can't close schools due a pandemic that killed millions but we can commit genocide and you'll find an excuse for it. we should pass the patriot act because it strips rights but we should forcibly move native americans 1000s of miles from their homes only to steal the land we forced them to.

drop your self righteousness.

[Juxtapose]

You're a damn fool if you think people we conquered would not have conquered us if also given the same opportunity.

What I am worrying about has an actual impact on modern day society and what you are worrying about is some symbolic gesture that's not going to do a damn thing.

[NamerOfStars]

Ah, historical revisionism at its finest.

[GOLDFISH_smile]

Sure, makes sense.

[Drewtate]

Seems silly. What is the purpose?

[lightbulb27]

To make right where there were clearly wrongs. No different than what we do for wild bears and coyotes… they roam around and munch on deer and such. there's nonproblem as long as Indians also regard the others

[jahaims]

Nope.