3 ms·

Why "militia members" and not "terrorists?"

• kaminar 6y ago
  Because then they'd have to call blm and antifa terrorists too.
  • sofixa 6y ago
    No, the FBI already said, "antifa" is not an organised group or movement, so you can't label an idea/ideal/goal "terrorist".
• rssmllr 6y ago
  In my opinion it's because 'militia' in the current climate has connotations with right wing groups. On the contrary, Brandon Caserta appears in several videos with an Anarchist flag behind him saying things like "Trump is not your friend": https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnN6ADbUve-hHgGp37oqODg https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnN6ADbUve-hHgGp37oqODg. Here's his mugshot for comparison: https://twitter.com/CNNNewsource/status/1314316594559025154 https://twitter.com/CNNNewsource/status/1314316594559025154 This twitter account is showing some of the more interesting clips: https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck
• cmurf 6y ago
  Militias by statute are under the authority of a state's governor. If they aren't under the governor's authority, they are not militias. They might be a gun club if non-violent. If violent, they're an armed gang or a crime syndicate. And certainly they aren't "well regulated" militias if they don't have the sanction of a state's governor. It's also sedition to attempt a violent overthrow of a state government or the federal government. The U.S. doesn't have a domestic terrorism statute, so they can't be called terrorists in the legal sense, but domestic violent extremists, which is the term DHS and FBI use.
  • bonestamp2 6y ago
    > It's also sedition to attempt a violent overthrow of a state government or the federal government. Sedition can also be speech that incites a revolt, and it carries a punishment of up to 20 years in the US.