The article is quite a whopper, calling this fellow a "family man". Yeah, a family man who killed another man's 14-year-old boy.
I looked into this story a bit, and I found the claim that Sammy Weaver had been shooting at the marshals after they executed his dog. Is there any actual evidence for this? Seems unlikely to me, he's 14 and he was shot in the back. On the other hand, as low as my opinion of government officials it, it seems not very likely that they would shoot at a 14-year-old for no reason (if only because they would suffer reputational damage, as they did).
Not just any bumblefuck sniper, an elite FBI Hostage Rescue Team sniper who graduated from West Point. Who then went on to fuck up Waco after fucking up Ruby Ridge.
Anyone that says "only trained police and military should have guns" needs to deepthroat a cactus.
The FBI sniper shot the woman with baby when called to the siege. The kid died in the initial shootout with the USM (chance encounter with the dudes who have been spying on them for weeks).
Moreso, anyone who would raise arms against any family (including pets) without just cause deserves to die, plain and simple. Being a government operative doesn’t give you license to harm others under the constitution, and the founders were very intentional about that.
From my understanding of the event, Sammy shot at them. But they were suspicious trespassers on his property, who had just slaughtered his dog. He had every single right to fire upon them, both legally and logically. Him being shot in the back was an attempted retreat as well. The Marshall's literally went there to "test" the dogs, and when one reacted like a fucking dog did they were shocked that the two guys followed the dog's barking.
In fact, they knew from the start they had fucked up bad. That's why they went into hard denial of even pretending anyone shot at the boy. Including the FBI "evidence" collection missing numerous bullets that the local sheriff office was able to just wander around and find later.
Like, every single aspect of the Ruby Ridge story can only be justified if you think the government is above the law and can do whatever they want to you, and you are supposed to grovel for their mercy or else they will rain hell upon you.
The article is quite a whopper, calling this fellow a "family man". Yeah, a family man who killed another man's 14-year-old boy.
I looked into this story a bit, and I found the claim that Sammy Weaver had been shooting at the marshals after they executed his dog. Is there any actual evidence for this? Seems unlikely to me, he's 14 and he was shot in the back. On the other hand, as low as my opinion of government officials it, it seems not very likely that they would shoot at a 14-year-old for no reason (if only because they would suffer reputational damage, as they did).
Not just any bumblefuck sniper, an elite FBI Hostage Rescue Team sniper who graduated from West Point. Who then went on to fuck up Waco after fucking up Ruby Ridge.
Anyone that says "only trained police and military should have guns" needs to deepthroat a cactus.
Man, humanity never ceases to come up with new stuff
H.G. Wells and Tesla couldn't have imagined such a future.
The FBI sniper shot the woman with baby when called to the siege. The kid died in the initial shootout with the USM (chance encounter with the dudes who have been spying on them for weeks).
“After they executed his dog”. Doesn’t matter, you shoot my dog, I’m putting every single fucking bullet I can find into you.
It’s self-defense, really. Anybody that would shoot your dog would just as likely shoot you.
Moreso, anyone who would raise arms against any family (including pets) without just cause deserves to die, plain and simple. Being a government operative doesn’t give you license to harm others under the constitution, and the founders were very intentional about that.
From my understanding of the event, Sammy shot at them. But they were suspicious trespassers on his property, who had just slaughtered his dog. He had every single right to fire upon them, both legally and logically. Him being shot in the back was an attempted retreat as well. The Marshall's literally went there to "test" the dogs, and when one reacted like a fucking dog did they were shocked that the two guys followed the dog's barking.
In fact, they knew from the start they had fucked up bad. That's why they went into hard denial of even pretending anyone shot at the boy. Including the FBI "evidence" collection missing numerous bullets that the local sheriff office was able to just wander around and find later.
Like, every single aspect of the Ruby Ridge story can only be justified if you think the government is above the law and can do whatever they want to you, and you are supposed to grovel for their mercy or else they will rain hell upon you.
I'm sure the Stasi and Schutzstaffel had family men in their ranks too.