Mass Shooting in Atlanta

It wasn't "wikipedia". Maybe you should read it.
Ruby Ridge | History, Facts, Aftermath, & Map
When Weaver refused to become an informant for the ATF, federal agents pursued a weapons charge against him. He was arrested and released with a trial set for February 19, 1991. The trial was then moved to February 20, but a probation officer sent a letter to Weaver, incorrectly stating that the new trial date was March 20. When Weaver failed to appear for trial, the court issued a bench warrant for his arrest. Weaver was subsequently indicted by a federal grand jury for failing to appear at trial, and the U.S. Marshal Service was tasked with arresting him. Marshals assessed that Weaver and his family were likely to resist violently if confronted directly, so plans for a stealth operation were drawn up.

On August 21, 1992, the situation turned violent after Weaver’s dog discovered a surveillance team of six heavily armed U.S. marshals inside the Ruby Ridge property. One of them shot and killed the dog, which led to an exchange of fire with Sammy Weaver, who was shot in the back and killed. Harris also opened fire, killing Degan.

After the shootings, the federal marshals requested assistance from the FBI, which dispatched its Hostage Rescue Team to Ruby Ridge. On August 22, Lon Horiuchi, an FBI sniper hiding about 200 yards (183 metres) from the cabin at Ruby Ridge, opened fire when he believed Weaver and Harris were preparing to shoot at an FBI helicopter. The first shot hit Randy Weaver in the arm. Horiuchi fired a second shot, meant for Harris, as the men ran back into the cabin. The bullet struck Vicki Weaver in the face while she held her infant daughter behind the front door of the cabin and also injured Harris. Vicki Weaver died soon after, but her body remained in the cabin for 11 days.

Weaver and Harris finally surrendered to the federal officers about a week later. They were charged with a host of crimes, including murder, conspiracy, and assault. An Idaho jury acquitted Harris of all charges. Weaver was convicted of failing to appear for the original firearms charge.

An inquiry by the Justice Department criticized the FBI for failing to gather sufficient intelligence and for not ordering the residents of the cabin to surrender before engaging them in a firefight. It also concluded that Horiuchi’s second shot was unconstitutional because Harris and Weaver were running for cover and could not be considered imminent threats. The inquiry further alleged that Horiuchi unnecessarily endangered others by firing at the door of the cabin. Nevertheless, the U.S. attorney general decided that criminal charges against Horiuchi were unwarranted. Prosecutors in Boundary county, Idaho, however, charged Horiuchi with involuntary manslaughter. The case was removed to a federal district court, which dismissed charges against Horiuchi, on the grounds that he was immune from prosecution because he was acting in his official capacity. An appeals court affirmed the district court’s ruling, but a second “en banc” (fuller complement of judges) panel reversed that decision and required that Horiuchi stand trial. Before a third, larger en banc panel could be convened to consider that decision, the state of Idaho announced that it was dropping charges, and all three earlier rulings were vacated.

In 1995 the federal government settled a lawsuit brought by Randy Weaver and his three surviving daughters.
 
When Weaver refused to become an informant for the ATF, federal agents pursued a weapons charge against him. He was arrested and released with a trial set for February 19, 1991. The trial was then moved to February 20, but a probation officer sent a letter to Weaver, incorrectly stating that the new trial date was March 20. When Weaver failed to appear for trial, the court issued a bench warrant for his arrest. Weaver was subsequently indicted by a federal grand jury for failing to appear at trial, and the U.S. Marshal Service was tasked with arresting him. Marshals assessed that Weaver and his family were likely to resist violently if confronted directly, so plans for a stealth operation were drawn up.

On August 21, 1992, the situation turned violent after Weaver’s dog discovered a surveillance team of six heavily armed U.S. marshals inside the Ruby Ridge property. One of them shot and killed the dog, which led to an exchange of fire with Sammy Weaver, who was shot in the back and killed. Harris also opened fire, killing Degan.

After the shootings, the federal marshals requested assistance from the FBI, which dispatched its Hostage Rescue Team to Ruby Ridge. On August 22, Lon Horiuchi, an FBI sniper hiding about 200 yards (183 metres) from the cabin at Ruby Ridge, opened fire when he believed Weaver and Harris were preparing to shoot at an FBI helicopter. The first shot hit Randy Weaver in the arm. Horiuchi fired a second shot, meant for Harris, as the men ran back into the cabin. The bullet struck Vicki Weaver in the face while she held her infant daughter behind the front door of the cabin and also injured Harris. Vicki Weaver died soon after, but her body remained in the cabin for 11 days.

Weaver and Harris finally surrendered to the federal officers about a week later. They were charged with a host of crimes, including murder, conspiracy, and assault. An Idaho jury acquitted Harris of all charges. Weaver was convicted of failing to appear for the original firearms charge.

An inquiry by the Justice Department criticized the FBI for failing to gather sufficient intelligence and for not ordering the residents of the cabin to surrender before engaging them in a firefight. It also concluded that Horiuchi’s second shot was unconstitutional because Harris and Weaver were running for cover and could not be considered imminent threats. The inquiry further alleged that Horiuchi unnecessarily endangered others by firing at the door of the cabin. Nevertheless, the U.S. attorney general decided that criminal charges against Horiuchi were unwarranted. Prosecutors in Boundary county, Idaho, however, charged Horiuchi with involuntary manslaughter. The case was removed to a federal district court, which dismissed charges against Horiuchi, on the grounds that he was immune from prosecution because he was acting in his official capacity. An appeals court affirmed the district court’s ruling, but a second “en banc” (fuller complement of judges) panel reversed that decision and required that Horiuchi stand trial. Before a third, larger en banc panel could be convened to consider that decision, the state of Idaho announced that it was dropping charges, and all three earlier rulings were vacated.

In 1995 the federal government settled a lawsuit brought by Randy Weaver and his three surviving daughters.
I had already read that.
 
A prime example of why a popularity contest shouldnt determine the future of our nation.

It doesn't. We have 3 branches for that reason. Just for most of the last 4 years they spent their days doing whatever the reality TV star told them to do.*

* (Sen. Romney excluded. Sen. McCain RIP excluded)
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
So what is a "moral" amount of interaction to show between a couple on primetime network TV?
I'm going to love this................
Way to come way out of left field with this one.

To answer your question: whatever, as long as its consentual. If you dont want your kids watching something, parent them.
 
Slavery was certainly more moral 3000 years ago than it is today. Don't you think?
Showing a little cleavage is certainly more moral today than it was 140 years ago.
Saying damn on TV is certainly more moral today than it was 50 years ago.
Saying colored person is certainly less moral today than is was 40 years ago.
Marrying a 14 year old was certainly more moral 300 years ago than it is today.

Does anyone actually believe that morality doesn't change over time?
Its an interesting topic.

If what you re subscribing to is correct. Meaning morality changes over time.
Can you even question if anything is moral or immoral? If it can change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
It doesn't. We have 3 branches for that reason. Just for most of the last 4 years they spent their days doing whatever the reality TV star told them to do.*

* (Sen. Romney excluded. Sen. McCain RIP excluded)
EOs have become too much of a thing to claim 3 branches anymore. Thanks Obama.

And besides I thought Trump packed the courts, so really it should be considered like 1.5 branches at best, right? Maybe 2, half the judiciary and half the legislative.
 
EOs have become too much of a thing to claim 3 branches anymore. Thanks Obama.

And besides I thought Trump packed the courts, so really it should be considered like 1.5 branches at best, right? Maybe 2, half the judiciary and half the legislative.

EOs are useless. pomp and circumstance but useless. Trump reversed Obamas and Biden is reversing all of Trumps (thank God).

The Senate has missed multiple opportunities to take their rightful claim as the most powerful federal body
 
Its an interesting topic.

If what you re subscribing to is correct. Meaning morality changes over time.
Can you even question if anything is moral or immoral? If it can change.
And also what subset of the whole of humanity is considered "society".
 
EOs are useless. pomp and circumstance but useless. Trump reversed Obamas and Biden is reversing all of Trumps (thank God).

The Senate has missed multiple opportunities to take their rightful claim as the most powerful federal body
Agreed.

We need more senators covering their own personal end using their government powers.
 
EOs are useless. pomp and circumstance but useless. Trump reversed Obamas and Biden is reversing all of Trumps (thank God).

The Senate has missed multiple opportunities to take their rightful claim as the most powerful federal body
Because it's about party, one popular group vs another.

There are many ways we could make our government better and keep the republic aspects of it, while reining in the damage democracy creates.
 
Its an interesting topic.

If what you re subscribing to is correct. Meaning morality changes over time.
Can you even question if anything is moral or immoral? If it can change.
Certainly. It has to be viewed within the context of present time.
 

VN Store



Back
Top