It has been confirmed they were headed for a meeting in a town some distance from the refuge.
They were driving there.
With all respects for the dead, they were armed anarchists. They had made an armed takeover of property they did not own. It was getting crazier every day. They were convening a “citizen’s gradn jury” to put liens on private property of elected officials they did not like.
I’m not surprised it ended in gunfire. I’m not surprised the anarchists lost the gun fight. I’m not surprised that within moments of the shooting, some of their supporters were posting that the clunk had been on his hands and knees and executed with 3 shots to the head.
It’s like the BLM crowd still believing the “Hands Up - Don’t Shoot” BS.
Bottom line, agree with their cause or not, the anarchists came looking for a gun fight, and got one. No one cries at a gun fight.
They are not anarchists and don’t fit the description of anarchists.
They had guns, but guns are legal, and if you’re staying in an unused firefighter’s shack, then they’d be useful for shooting squirrels ‘n sich.
This newspaper article says there is a claim that the mans hands were up and he was saying don’t shoot.
No one here is making anything up.
“”the anarchists came looking for a gun fight, and got one””
Where do you find proof there WAS a gun fight? Wouldn’t that imply there were guns fired AT the FBI or whatever law enforcement agency stopped them on the highway?
“If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.†-Samuel Adams
Just as there were traitorous wretches among the occupation in Oregon, there are traitorous wretches among us.
Labeling them as anarchists just displays your own misunderstanding of them and what they stand for. Plain and simple.
They are not anarchists in the least. They are constitutionalists who took an oath to the country and the constitution and who take it seriously and look to it to help define the law.
They feel that things have gotten intolerable from a constitutional standpoint and are standing up and protesting. They may not be doing so in the way you would like, but they are certainly the furthest thing from anarchists. They do not seek anarchy in the least.