What is it about the Ruby ridge militia types that they must threaten the lives of anything and anyone that steps onto their property?
We have some around here. The no tresspassing signs are almost a decoration, they are so prevalent. Why is it that they really want people to know that they will be shot dead the second the accidentally touch their property?
If they think they own the land they reside on, try skipping paying the proprty taxes.
Cooper had already written a considerable amount on a topic he felt he had been given private exposure to which involved an intricate mother of all conspiracy theories.
He wrote about it and publicized it out of concern and loyalty enuniciated in the ilk of our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
That doesn't mean he was correct in everything he wrote, but IMHO he did devote considerable effort to document many of his beliefs and derived those beliefs in large part from personal experience and his personal research. i.e. he performed due diligence.
The fellow he threatened wasn't the type to take a hint, nor was he the type to be intimidated. But as a third party observer of hearsay, it's obvious that a man living on his own property surrounded by BLM real property has more interests vested in that real property than a stranger. Given Cooper's past public exposure of a conspiracy which he considered quite persuasive, it really isn't necessary for any stranger to continue to pursue Cooper onto Cooper's real property, i.e. trespass.
It might also be noted amongst those who are serious with weapons, that armed intimidation generally isn't employed. If the accusation that Cooper was an armed aggressor was true, then Cooper would have shot the trespasser without a verbal diatribe. The report that Cooper encountered the trespasser before the trespasser reached any other private property or property with possibly more interest by others than Cooper only reveals that Cooper respected his fellow man sufficiently to communicate to the trespasser that Cooper's interests had been violated to an extent beyond the uninformed might understand.
If I trespassed on somebody's property, I'd expect the same if not worse to happen to me.
Why do you believe you can intimidate a person on their own personal real property in rebellion to their property rights and then have the audacity to act insulted if they defend themselves?
Your statement about Ruby Ridge is BS pure and simple. Randy Weaver was not threatening anyone who set foot on his land, although he technically had the right to do so.
I have several friends who are frankly on the looney right. They believe the government is compiling records on them, won' buy a gun from a dealer etc. The interesting thing about them is that they are all decent likeable people who, perhaps understandably, are paranoid about the government.
I also have a few acquaintances who are on the looney left. The real difference between them and those on the right is that they are nearly all just plain jerks, The type people who would sell their Mother into slavery. They are filled with hatred and bigotry against any conservative.
They both are wrong but one side is composed of good hard working people whose views are completely understandable in light of Ruby Ridge and Waco. The other side, of which you are imo a memeber are just plain creeps.
Present some evidence to back up your comment.
That is what Ruby Ridge was about?