posted on June 5, 2001 04:07:08 PM new
I'm sure almost everyone is at least nominally familiar with the Ruby Ridge thing. Long story short, reclusive white separatist Randy Weaver ends up in a sitation with FBI agents surrounding his home to try to arrest him for failing to make a court appearance to face charges of illegal weapons sales. His wife and 14-year old son end up dead, at the hands of FBI sharpshooters. This incident was a watershed for people like Tim McVeigh, "evidence" of an out of control Federal gov't.
Anyway, while obviously it was an outrageous incident, doesn't it strike you that the sharpshooter himself shouldn't necessarily be faulted but rather his superiors should have their heads roll for this? I'm not saying even to excuse this guy, but rather it seems like he's merely going to take the fall for the crimes of his bosses.
posted on June 5, 2001 04:21:36 PM new
I agree up to a point that his superiors should share some of the blame. But I do remember reading some time ago, that the same sniper responsible for killing Weaver's wife was also the subject of an investigation regarding some behavior (i.e. shots fired) at Waco as well. It may be we have a sniper who gets a little too excited when things get tight regardless of what his superiors say.
posted on June 5, 2001 04:25:06 PM new
I heard about the sharpshooter being charged with man-slaughter on NPR this afternoon. I don't feel he should be the scapegoat, but it looks like he is. The Federal government wouldn't prosecute him and the state government seems to have nobody else to prosecute.
Ruby Ridge was a great example of a monkey mating with a football, this upcoming trial seems to be from the same mold.
posted on June 5, 2001 04:32:17 PM new"....doesn't it strike you that the sharpshooter himself shouldn't necessarily be faulted but rather his superiors should have their heads roll for this?"
I agree. If he was ordered to shoot, why should he, alone, be responsible?
Maybe this will open up the can of worms on this mess. Someone should pay for this.
posted on June 5, 2001 04:50:34 PM new
I would really like more info before passing judgement on this issue. I'd also heard that this shooter was involved at Waco, but have never heard anything final on what his actions were. (Of course, I still think there are a hell of a lot of unanswered questions about Waco).
I will agree that in general, the shooter should not stand alone. Even if he did fire without permission, if he was trigger happy I'd like to know why he still had a job.
posted on June 5, 2001 04:57:25 PM new
The supervising FBI officials released their shooters to shoot any adult who showed themselves - even if unarmed and without regard to being named in the warrant they were serving or due to any particular actions.
That is just cold blooded murder. Both shooter and one giving the orders are guilty just like a driver in a bank robbery shares guilt if another robber shoots inside the bank.
It is the same as the East Germans used to do to shoot anyone approuching the Berlin Wall.
Having orders did not protect them from charges when their government fell.
If you have a federal warrant written against you figure that as things stand it may be served by being pinned on your body bag after they sneak on your property and blow your brains out.
They think that by swarming in with a military style assault they will intimidate people into surrenduring immediatly. There are plenty of bad boys out there that will just figure "What the heck I might as well take a few with me since they are going to shoot me anyway." Next stage maybe they will run into Claymore's and land mines if they want to play commando in the woods.
