That's the same rhethoric behind Oklahoma city bombing for those at home.
It's the same sort of stochastic terrorists that end up in the QAnon hole these days.
I don't know why we pay their talking points any attention.
"If any adult in the area around the cabin is observed with a weapon after the surrender announcement had been made, deadly force could and should be used to neutralize the individual."
There's an initial crime (sex with 12yr old for David Koresh, and selling illegal weaponry to white supremacist criminal orgs for Randy Weaver).
Then they don't engage the legal system normally by hiring a lawyer and fighting the charges -- they hide in a hole hoping to be forgotten about.
When the feds inevitably try to serve a warrant, in both cases they respond in a hostile manner and kill a LEO.
At this point you can basically be expected to be treated like a drug lord -- you're facing charges and responding to warrants by killing officers. So you get besieged like a drug lord.
The main difference for Ruby Ridge is that the government took a bunch of decisions (procedural mistakes, over-eager sniper and rules of engagement) that made them unsympathetic.
But even with this, it's a little absurd to come out and defend the Weavers for playing very stupid games and winning stupid prizes. You kill a law enforcement office in a hostile manner, don't expect to be treated with courtesy.
There's hundreds of cases where LEOs are recklessly killing innocents in manners that should get them lambasted, but Ruby Ridge ain't it.
>Then they don't engage the legal system normally by hiring a lawyer and fighting the charges -- they hide in a hole hoping to be forgotten about.
Weaver was acquitted on all charges, with the exception of a charge for failing to appear in court for the original charge that lead to the siege. And the rules of engagement still are and were murder.
Instead they keep trying to evade the legal system and inevitably get someone knocking at the door.
If your response to that knock on the door is to shoot, you get what's coming to you.
The other point is that this unsympathetic case is viewed in some special light when there's a ton of cases where the government is much much more clearly in the wrong.
The difference is that in those other cases it's generally a "them" (ethnic minorities, urban poor, etc.) whereas for libertarian weirdoes like Weaver they somehow get lumped in the HackerNews zeitgeist's "us".
They shot a kid in the back, and shot a woman holding a baby through a window.
This case is a barometer for whether or not a person likes the taste of boot leather.
Even a number of police agree. Here's a claim from one of the U.S Marshalls on site:
"Many of the people the USMS used as third party go-betweens on the Weaver case—Bill and Judy Grider, Alan Jeppeson, and Richard Butler—were assessed by the Marshals as more radical than the Weavers. When Deputy U.S. Marshal (DUSM) Dave Hunt asked Grider, "Why shouldn't I just go up there ... and talk to him?", Grider replied, "Let me put it to you this way. If I was sitting on my property and somebody with a gun comes to do me harm, then I'll probably shoot him."
Or how about the deputy assistant director of the FBI at the time, writing in a memo that:
"Something to Consider 1. Charge against Weaver is Bull S___. 2. No one saw Weaver do any shooting. 3. Vicki has no charges against her. 4. Weaver's defense. He ran down the hill to see what dog was barking at. Some guys in camys [camouflage] shot his dog. Started shooting at him. Killed his son. Harris did the shooting. He is in pretty strong legal position."
As one of the comments above states: Let the reader decide what constitutes a reasonable attempt to serve a warrant".
From the Ruby Ridge wiki:
"On August 21, 1992, six Marshals were sent to scout the area to determine suitable places away from the cabin to apprehend and arrest Weaver. The marshals, dressed in military camouflage, were equipped with night-vision goggles and M16 rifles. DUSMs Art Roderick, Larry Cooper, and William F. "Bill" Degan formed the reconnaissance team, while DUSMs David Hunt, Joseph Thomas, and Frank Norris formed an observation post (OP) team on the ridge north of the cabin.
At one point, Roderick threw two rocks at the Weaver cabin to test the dogs' reaction. The action provoked the dogs; Weaver's friend, Kevin Harris, and Weaver's 14-year-old son, Samuel ("Sammy"), emerged and followed the dog "Striker" to investigate. Harris and the younger Weaver said that they were hoping the dog had noticed a game animal as the cabin was out of meat. The recon team (Roderick, Cooper, and Degan) initially retreated through the woods in radio contact with the OP team, but later took up hidden defensive positions.
Later, the OP team and the Weavers claimed the dogs were alerted to the recon team in the woods after neighbors at the foot of the mountain started their pickup truck. The recon team retreated through the woods to a "Y" junction in the trails 500 yards (460 m) west of the cabin, out of sight of the cabin. Sammy and Harris followed Striker on foot through the woods while Randy, also on foot, took a separate logging trail; Vicki, Sara, Rachel, and baby Elisheba remained at the cabin. The OP team were anxious at first, but then relaxed. Randy encountered the Marshals at the "Y"; Roderick claimed to have yelled, "Back off! U.S. Marshal!" upon sighting Weaver, and Cooper said he had shouted, "Stop! U.S. Marshal!" By their account, Sammy and Striker came out of the woods about a minute later. When the Marshals' position was revealed by the dog "Striker", a yellow Labrador Retriever, DUSM Roderick shot the dog dead. Seeing this, Sammy Weaver reacted by shooting in the direction of Roderick. DUSM Cooper then shot towards Sammy Weaver and Kevin Harris, who both sought cover. Harris, once finding cover behind a tree stump, then returned fire with one unaimed shot, which eventually killed DUSM William Francis "Bill" Degan. Sammy Weaver, now retreating up a hill was then shot in the back and killed by DUSM Cooper."
It will be left as an exercise to the reader to determine if the above constitutes an "attempt to serve a warrant".
Nor do actual threats become any less threatening (if anything, the opposite).
So not paying any attention to the talking points, i.e. not reading TFA, wont have any effect.
Not to mention that the people "sane" enough head the advice and not read it, are the ones who wouldn't do anything shady even if they read it anyway...