Ruby Ridge re-opened

So, Sam, please tell me where I have “defended the government” in this thread. Was it here?

Weaver’s views and actions matter, despite the best efforts of the Randy Weaver Sainthood Committee to whitewash them, because they help explain (not excuse) the feds’ actions in 1992, and because they show he is unworthy of the martyr-worship that so many people have bestowed on him.

Other posters have already discussed the very bad stuff that the feds did to the Weaver family. But why were the feds after him at all, and why did they show up prepared for a bloodbath? Could it have anything to do with the fact that he was a heavily-armed white seperatist who was drinkin’ buddies with one of the most violent white supremacist organizations in the country?

Context matters, friends and neighbors.

So does truth. And the implication of this rhetorical question

is a lie that is all the more remarkable in that it follows its own refutation!

Huh?

Right, and you don’t think that the Feds were being just as bigoted and arrogant as Weaver when they showed up at his place armed to the teeth? They assumed that because he’d shown up at an Aryan Nations meeting he shared their views, they assumed that because he knew about guns he’d try to go out in a “blaze of glory.”

Randy Weaver is not a hero! Randy Weaver is person who has suffered horribly at the hands of our government. No doubt when the ATF/FBI guys decided to swoop down on him, they thought that it would be good PR for them. Instead, they fucked up. They fucked up bad, and some innocent people got killed.

Weaver may be a dirtbag, **but ** that doesn’t justify what happened to him.

I totally agree with you, Tuckerfan.

Minty

Then take back some of your assertions about Weaver and his family.

I gave a whole list of refutations above, from a quite liberal source, to some of the baseless crap being thrown around. You’ve yet to address any of it, including the one that shoots down the presumption that Randy Weaver was “drinking buddies” with the Aryan Nation.

I have to agree with Milossarian. Your take on this is remarkable. I am even more socially liberal than you are, yet I know a stinking rat when I smell it. I’d like to think you’ve merely gotten yourself into an unfortunate hole, and that you have balls enough to ask for a hand-up out of it.

It’s not too late. Yet.

From what I remember, the government’s original motivation in this was to turn Weaver into an informant. That’s why they entrapped him with the shotgun - they wanted to put him in a position where he would agree to inform on his ‘friends’ in the Aryan Nation.

If so, then even the way this whole thing started is evil. The government should not be in the business of blackmailing citizens.

Oh, is that all you’re talking about, Lib? No problem.

Nevertheless, the jury DID convict him of failure to appear. Where’s my “lie”?

And the fact that he doesn’t immediately spit in the guy’s face somehow proves Weaver isn’t a racist? Besides, you completely ignore the other piece of the story I quoted, wherein Our Hero says he feels “sorry” for the next generation because there’s gonna be so many minorities around. Sounds like racism to me.

What’s your beef here, Lib? I said he spent time hanging around with the Aryan Nations, and your quote says he spent time hanging around with the Aryan Nations. And the clear implication from the last sentence is that he thinks some of those guys are not “punk idiots,” which is pretty damn ridiculous in my mind. And if you’re upset about my “drinking buddies” comment, that’s the sentence in the article you omitted with the ellipses: “Weaver says he’d drink beer and talk to the skinheads.”

First, this was Needs2Know, not me. Second, how on earth is your quote supposed to refute her assertion?

I say he’s a bigot, you say the FBI behaved badly. These are not mutually exlusive propositions, you know. The later assertion in no way contradicts the former.

See previous comment.

I say he spent seventeen months avoiding the criminal justice system and training his kids to defend Casa Not-So-Grande, you give me an update on where his kids live today. Not to put too fine a point on it, but WTF does that have to do with what I said?

Sam

That’s correct. They wanted a rat, and he refused to be one. (see the article I’ve linked above…)

Minty

You cannot possibly hate bigotry more than I. But you would not find me trivializing the murder of a boy and his mother in the name of hating bigotry. And that’s what you’re doing.

No, it’s not what I’m doing, Lib. It is quite possible to condemn the government’s actions at Ruby Ridge without whitewashing Randy Weaver’s own sins. Yet several posters to this thread, in the course of condemning the feds, have minimized Weaver’s reprehensible views and his actions that contributed to the tragedy.

Here’s an example:

According to Gerry Spence’s book–and Spence was Weaver’s defense attorney–Weaver had indeed been given contradictory information about his trial date. The magistrate had told him to be in court on February 19, 1991, and his probation officer had said it was March 20, 1991.

Randy Weaver never showed up in court on either date. He made no attempts to resolve the discrepancy. Instead, on March 5, he and his family sent a letter to the U.S. Attorney basically stating that they weren’t going anywhere.

In other words, Saint Randy intentionally failed to appear in court for his trial on federal weapons charges, which is just what the jury decided. It was by no means “due to a clerical error.”

Minty

From the Opening Post:

What say you? Yea or nay?

**
OK, special agents. This guy we are surrounding missed his court date.

Do we have authorization to shoot and kill unarmed members of his family, sir?

Well, our folks at headquarters are busy studying his past, stated viewpoints. But we expect word back any minute.

Reeder: Legally, it’s a close call, as the court’s 6-5 decision shows. Morally, I think it’s absolutely a good idea to go to trial and see what the facts show. From what I know of the shooting, it’s quite possible that the shooting was an act of criminal homicide.

Milo: You say he missed his court date, I say he was a fugitive from federal felony charges. Semantics, really. There were plenty of grounds to arrest Weaver, but their plan for doing so was incredibly stupid, which obviously led to one bad thing after another happening.

As for Weaver specifically training his son to shoot federal agents… Do you have any proof of this assertion? Or is the fact that is son seemed capable of using a weapon de facto proof of this in your eyes?

If so, then I guess my grandfather was guilty of teaching me how to kill federal officers, because when I was young he bought me a rifle and taught me how to use it. Thanks, Grandpa.

Y’know, I sometimes think that the major disconnect going on here has to do with people raised in urban environments vs people raised in rural/farming environments. When people say things like, “There is no use for a gun other than to kill people”, those of us who know better just shake our heads in wonder. I grew up using a rifle and handgun as a tool, just like my shovel and hammer. We used them to kill animals for butchering, to get rid of gophers so that our horses wouldn’t break their legs in gopher holes, to get rid of muskrats and beavers so that they wouldn’t dam up a stream and flood our crops, etc. And because guns were part of the culture, we also learned to appreciate nice ones, so we’d sometimes collect them, enter shooting competitions, gun shows, etc. Just like, say, suburban people own nice cars and rich ones sometimes even collect them. Tell Jay Leno that the only thing cars are good for is transportation. He’s got a warehouse full of 'em, just because loves to look at them, tinker with them, and occasionally take them out for a pleasure drive. Exactly the way gun people collect them, tinker with them, and sometimes take them to the range for a shoot.

And yes, if someone in our neighborhood was good enough with metal working to be able to modify guns, we’d sometimes take a gun in to get worked on. Shotguns are particularly useful for getting rid of vermin, and I’ve seen many a cut-down shotgun in my day (it makes it easier to store them in the cab of the truck and retrieve them. It also can make them safer to handle, because a long barrel can be a pain and get caught up in things. And it makes them even more useful for vermin dispatching, because a shorter barrel means a wider spread at close ranges). We probably broke all kinds of federal firearms laws, but we wouldn’t have known because it just wouldn’t have occured to us that anyone could care how long the barrels were on our shotguns.

But you city folks hear about a guy who cut down the barrel of a shotgun, and your automatic assumption is that he must have been a nefarious gun dealer supplying arms to hate groups. And anyone in the ‘gun culture’ is automatically tried and convicted by many people who think of guns only as those evil things that gangs and robbers carry.

I’ve known lots of people like Randy Weaver, because I grew up in a Mennonite commnity that had its share of odd ducks that rejected most of society and lived by themselves off in the bush. Our attitude was, “Nice folks, I guess. Pretty strange, but they make a great marmelade. Let’s go visit and buy some.” In other words, their personal beliefs, prejudices, etc., just made no impact. We just didn’t judge people by the way they lived, as long as they were good to us. But if someone reneged on his debts, or was known to be lazy, that was enough to get him shunned from the community. Those were the values. If we found out someone was a racist, we’d just make sure to steer the conversation around that to avoid unpleasantness.

On the other hand, if we saw someone actually act in a racist fashion, he’d catch hell for it. I remember my grandfather dressing down a stranger in the street once because the guy hurled a racial epithet at someone. But if they kept it to themselves, it was live and let live.

Perhaps that’s why I’m so appalled that some of you seem to be taking the attitude of, “Hey, if he didn’t want to have federal agents all over him shooting at his family, he shouldn’t have rejected society and lived off in the bush. He shouldn’t have taught his kid to shoot, and he shouldn’t have cut down that barrel. He brought it on himself.”

Hell, the Unabomber got more sympathy, and he’s a murderer.

I got into trouble on another thread by suggesting the possibility that Matthew Shepard had in some way contributed to his horrible murder. I see a parallel here.

Nuff said.

If Randy Weaver is thought of as a hero, just what made him that in the eyes of the people that see him that way? had anyone ever heard of him before the assault? Had the authorities just knocked on his door and arrested him you still wouldn’t have heard of Randy Weaver. The authorities created Randy Weaver.

I would say this is a major case of two wrongs not making a right.

Randy Weaver was no saint-far from it. That said, the feds shouldn’t have shot his wife. They screwed up. That doesn’t mean he’s innocent, though.

Wait a minute. Who needs a cite to prove that law enforcement bursts in on people, guns drawn in the early hours of day in order to arrest someone? All you need to do is turn on your TV to local news or watch COPS to see them proudly using these kind of tactics. Most often there are others in these private residences that are not the target of the arrest, many of them have women and children. Just this morning there was a report of a shooting here in Richmond. An off duty cop, moonlighting as a bouncer in a local bar shot and killed a man for throwing rocks at him. Let’s at least get real here please!

Law enforcement has become increasingly more brutal toward the citizenry. You need only be black and living somewhere like L.A., New York, Cincinatti or even South Carolina to realize that. Not only has it become more brutal but it has become ever more willing to stretch the limit on our civil rights. A good example of that would be the recent ruling by the Supreme Court and the seat belt mother case. The problem is we asked for this! Yes we did, or at least our elected officials think we did. It has been our cry as citizens to the government to reduce crime that has lead to these Draconian measures.

My contention is that the Randy Weavers of this country will not do anything but excaberate the problem. It wouldn’t suprise me if Randy wouldn’t agree that every gang banger in L.A. should be locked up with their own guns to wipe each other out. Yet, when it came to him and his unlawful activities that was a case of the big bad gubberment invading his civil rights. Everyone has a case against the government that reflects their own self interest.

Instead of finding reasons to minimize Mr. Weavers culpability in his own demise in some vain attempt to make the government look even worse, why not offer a few theories as to a solution? This is not an urban or a rural issue. This issue is important for every American, but then that is another thread.

Needs2know

Needs2know wrote:

Yeah, but notice, he’d still let them keep their guns! :stuck_out_tongue:

Here I go agian,
The government entrapped Weaver into cutting down the shot gun (thats why he did not do time for it). Had Weaver paid the tax on the modifacation, it would have been leagel to perform any way. He was originally arrested on a tax charge (see my earlier post). Weaver was targeted by the BATF to be used as an informat on the Aryans, which he refused. By refusing to inform he was further targeted to be made an example of. That is the entire thing in a nut shell.
As for the association with the Aryans, I hardly think guilt by association is a capitol offence. Think about who you have met or talked to in the past, could anyone you know be bad enough to get you targeted? How do you know?

As for the white seperatist BS, if everyone who chose not to live next door to someone different than themselves was a suspect, the suburbers would be full of federal agents investigating old ladys who move out when “they” move in. Weaver just took it to the next level moving to the hills to be alone.

Weaver may not be a saint, but to suggest he caused his situation is not right either. The situation was caused by the government, he may not have responed correctly but he did not cause it.

As for the OP, yes it is a good thing the shooter may be tried, “could and should” rules of engagement were wrong to order, and “just following orders” is not a defence when the order is illeagal/immoral. Harris was not a threat when he was shot at resulting in Vicki Weavers death. The only way to justify the government killing someone without a trial is if they are a immediate threat to someone else.