Find hikes, GPS routes, photos and triplogs journals. Extensive collection of flora, fauna, geology and culture labels. Archaeologist, biologist, book authors, historians and outfitters galore keep our content true.
https://hikearizona.com/dex2/
If they did so in a completely peaceful manner, I would find it respectable, however pointless, and in given completely hypothetical situation, the developers would probably either A) find somewhere else to build their development or B) in an unpeaceful manner plow through with a bulldozer anyway. I concede that I am biased, but I would also like to point out that no argument is bulletproof, no matter what your opinion is, on such moral dilemmas. However, it is necessary to question the higher authority from time to time.chumley wrote:Would you walk up to their human barricade everyday ready to go hiking, only to be rejected from accessing the HPP Wilderness, and honestly feel that their actions are right and just?
See? Common ground. We agree! Isn't HAZ great?hippiepunkpirate wrote:I would also like to point out that no argument is bulletproof, no matter what your opinion is, on such moral dilemmas. However, it is necessary to question the higher authority from time to time.
Well, the US has certainly given them a good role model for this - why else did we go into Iraq if it wasn't our "belief" that someone was doing something on land we didn't own?The Stillernator wrote:If you can for a moment try to look beyond the environmental part of the debate, I don’t like the idea of a group of people who make a point to declare themselves as separate from the rest of the US trying to have a hand in what occurs on land that doesn’t belong to them because they don’t like something for whatever reason
if this was on a reservation, i would agree with the civil rights issue. But (I really feel the need to STRESS this), THIS IS FEDERALLY OWNED LAND THAT THEY WANT TO DICTATE THE TERMS OF DEVELOPMENT ON! and they claim they have the right to do this based on their religion.hippiepunkpirate wrote:When you FEEL that your rights get stepped on and the law agrees with it, should you not stand up for yourself? Or is that simply "throwing a tantrum"?
Personally, I hate whitey... :STP:sidhayes wrote:It is not "AWESOME",and it is not "peaceful". What do you have against "white people" playing in the snow?
Chris Farley in Black Sheep...jeffmacewen wrote:Personally, I hate whitey... :STP:
"KILLLL WHITEEEY!!"chumley wrote:Chris Farley in Black Sheep...jeffmacewen wrote:Personally, I hate whitey... :STP:
I find that destroying property is the best way to influence people's opinions. :roll:Police investigating anti-Snowbowl graffiti
Graffiti found over the weekend in the Southside and Plaza Vieja neighborhoods is carrying an anti-Snowbowl sentiment.
Police responded to Nimarco's Pizza, Beaver Street Gallery, Guadalupe Park, a Flagstaff Fire station, the Harbert Chapel and First Baptist Church for reports of spray-painted graffiti that included phrases such as "Protect the Peaks," "Smash Snowbowl" and "No poop snow."
The damage at the churches is considered a felony under state law.
Local activist Rudy Preston, who runs the website truesnow.org, said he doesn't necessarily condone the graffiti. He prefers to spread messages through non-permanent chalk.
He doesn't know who exactly would be responsible for the graffiti.
"My personal feelings on it: it's to be expected," he said. "It's not like it hasn't happened, like, for the last 10 years in this town."
That sort of attitude isn't likely to win supporters among those with leverage on the final outcome. How old is this guy? I don't know if the battle he's fighting is winnable, but statements like this surely don't help his cause.chumley wrote:"My personal feelings on it: it's to be expected," he said. "It's not like it hasn't happened, like, for the last 10 years in this town."
X 2azbackpackr wrote:These people need to get a life.
Hey now. That's an awful broad brush you're painting with. I know a fair number of snowboarders who are not potheads, and at least a couple of skiers who are. I don't think the type of winter recreation people enjoy, or even if somebody is a stoner, defines this kind of idiocy. Stupid doesn't belong to any one group.Alston Neal wrote:I wonder if the punks that are doing this are also snowboarders.
Too stoned to see the difference between reality and their dogma.
Yeah you're right I guess I was using the paint roller method.chumley wrote:Hey now. That's an awful broad brush you're painting with.Alston Neal wrote:I wonder if the punks that are doing this are also snowboarders.
Too stoned to see the difference between reality and their dogma.
I have heard rumors of such things, but until now I just considered it hearsay.chumley wrote:.....I know a fair number of snowboarders who are not potheads, and at least a couple of skiers who are.