Another article said this is wrong. There was one 44 yr old from Bothic that’s been arrested but no militia… Yet.
So how about the cops do their fuckin jobs and go round up these people.
They did. The threat was established to be incorrect and the lone person making the threat was detained, and workers are back in the area.
Detained on a misdemeanor and released. It’s also not clear whether these are two separate reports.
The Washington Post article goes over the threats and there is nothing substantiating the armed militia.
It would be a bit odd to me for the national guard to report to the US Forestry that they saw an armed militia and wouldn’t be actively pursuing it. Seems more likely is was a miscommunication in a hectic environment.
Because that’s how you get reactionary keyboad warriors going “OMG ACAB WHY ARE THEY ARRESTING THEM THIS IS LITERALLY 1984” on every website and media outlet. Also, probably firefights, officer-involved shootings, and further inflammation of a situation that was fucked from the start.
People don’t tend to use their best judgement when blues are involved, especially in America.
We’re talking about armed militia members hunting federal workers. I don’t think they’d take kindly to the presence of a blue uniform. I’d sooner send in the army and let the good god Darwin sort it out.
The area is a powder keg and you’re offering a matchstick.
This is why we can’t have nice things.
How are those fuckers not in jail?
They aren’t organized by the Sate. They have no official authority. So they aren’t really a Militia.
They are a literal gang.
Stop calling them Militia.
Militia isn’t defined by being part of the State.
It’s a term used to describe a military force comprised of civilians. There’s even a modern connotation of being against the state.
a military force that engages in rebel or terrorist activities in opposition to a regular army.
Gangs aren’t purely for military purposes, so if the purpose of this gang is an armed attack against a govenrment agency, then it’s not unreasonable to call them a militia.
I think the term is private vs state militias, and with this article being about armed militias, we are talking about armed private vs armed state militias. I think technically all 50 states have laws on the books that prohobit various forms of private armed militia activity. Is it enforceable? Maybe, but that would maybe probably cause a nation wide incident given the amount of violence these groups can wield (though they would probably still lose against any organized state militias or any official state/federal military force), as well as increase the chance of a homegrown insurgency popping up. That’s just my armchair opinion or thought about it though, I’m just armchairing here.
