# I think Timothy McVeigh's actions were not an entirely unreasonable reaction to Ruby Ridge and Waco. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 22, 2018, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-think-timothy-mcveighs-actions-were-not-an-entirely-unreasonable-reaction-to-ruby-ridge-and-waco/820081 "2018-08-22T23:01:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 121
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 24, 2018, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-think-timothy-mcveighs-actions-were-not-an-entirely-unreasonable-reaction-to-ruby-ridge-and-waco/820081/121 "2018-08-24T01:40:34Z")
> [@nelliebly](#): > > Wait a minute. By saying you support trespass and peaceable acceptance of arrest as justified in a wide variety of circumstances, aren’t you saying, according to your logic, that this would result in the"very predictable outcome" that someone would wave your name “as license to commit crimes but then evade the part where they willingly accept consequences”? I think there’s a subtle distinction I’m making: when I say I support it, I probably should have chosen a different word, since “support,” carries a connotation of approval I did not really intend. The very predictable outcome should be vitiated by the fact that I’m not supporting avoidance of criminal sanctions. Perhaps “understand,”’ is a better word. But I’m kind of weaseling here, because I guess there are examples I can picture when I’d literally support the decision to go to jail to protest an unjust law. Which makes me different in degree, not in kind, from the same thing I’m decrying. Huh. OK, I’m building a house on the sand here. Until I think of some principled distinction, I concede the point, and withdraw my argument. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-think-timothy-mcveighs-actions-were-not-an-entirely-unreasonable-reaction-to-ruby-ridge-and-waco/820081)._