Call armed right-wing extremists "gangs," "criminals," or "terrorists," NOT militias

[Frederick Foresight]

https://www.change.org/p/cnn-fox-ne...ts-gangs-criminals-or-terrorists-not-militias

The media refers to armed right-wing extremists as "militias". These groups are ideologically driven armed gangs and not really militias at all. Therefore, the media needs to start using more accurate labels for these groups, such as gangs, criminals, terrorists, or simply right-wing extremists.

Historically (in the U.S.) militias were organized at the town or village level and fell under the authority of the state. They were not formed to threaten the state, but rather to serve the state at a time when the colonies/U.S. had no (or a small) standing army.

The media would never use the label of "militia" to describe group of armed black men, or armed muslim-Americans who had used their weapons to take over and occupy a federal building or installation. Media outlets who refer to predominantly white right-wing armed extremists as a militia and not as a gang or terrorists are guilty of a double standard that needs to be corrected.

 

[Arnie]

LOL!
Sean O'Mara started this petition with a single signature, and now has 7 supporters. Start a petition today to change something you care about.

 

[jem]

so Paul Revere and friends were working for the Brits? The British are coming... Yea?

https://www.change.org/p/cnn-fox-ne...ts-gangs-criminals-or-terrorists-not-militias

The media refers to armed right-wing extremists as "militias". These groups are ideologically driven armed gangs and not really militias at all. Therefore, the media needs to start using more accurate labels for these groups, such as gangs, criminals, terrorists, or simply right-wing extremists.

Historically (in the U.S.) militias were organized at the town or village level and fell under the authority of the state. They were not formed to threaten the state, but rather to serve the state at a time when the colonies/U.S. had no (or a small) standing army.

The media would never use the label of "militia" to describe group of armed black men, or armed muslim-Americans who had used their weapons to take over and occupy a federal building or installation. Media outlets who refer to predominantly white right-wing armed extremists as a militia and not as a gang or terrorists are guilty of a double standard that needs to be corrected.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

so Paul Revere and friends were working for the Brits? The British are coming... Yea?

Nice try. You really see no difference between Revere and present-day Right Wing militia groups?

Also, I'm not exactly sure what your point is. Are you? Revere's famous ride occurred in 1775, which was before the US became a sovereign nation. However, the Constitution was ratified over a dozen years later, and the Second Amendment relating to armed militias for the security of a free state came a few years after that.

Again, your point being...?

 

[jem]

I realize you are Canadian but if you are going to comment on History and U.S. constitutional rights... you need to think deeper.

Your short article pretended to consider history. It was a bullshit version of with history... and I eviscerated its point in one sentence.

The minutemen were a militia... Historically Americans were armed... We were armed against the state at the time... the Brits. We used arms to protect our rights... and that in part is why we have the second amendment.




Minutemen were private colonists who independently organized to form well-prepared militia companies self-trained in weaponry, tactics and military strategies from the American colonial partisan militia during the American Revolutionary War. They were also known for being ready in a minute's notice.
Minutemen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nice try. You really see no difference between Revere and present-day Right Wing militia groups?

Also, I'm not exactly sure what your point is. Are you? Revere's famous ride occurred in 1775, which was before the US became a sovereign nation. However, the Constitution was ratified over a dozen years later, and the Second Amendment relating to armed militias for the security of a free state came a few years after that.

Again, your point being...?

 

[ETcallhome]

My days of expecting the media to be honest and objctive are long over. But I hope they don't start calling the crips and bloods militias.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

We were armed against the state at the time... the Brits.

And is that, or anything resembling it, still an issue today?

It is your comparison of Revere to present-day Right Wing militia groups (usually comprising white supremacists) that is self-eviscerating.

 

[ETcallhome]

and a Minuteman could shoot and reload 3 shots in a minute, that was the requirement to be a member

 

[jem]

you and your article are pushing leftist detritus.
yes... Americans need to be ready for a breakdown in proper govt.
We saw what happened in New Orleans after the hurricane.
We have seen what happened in L.A. during the riots.
I remind you of The Koreans in Koreatown were seen standing on top of buildings keeping order with their firearms.

And is that, or anything resembling it, still an issue today?

It is your comparison of Revere to present-day Right Wing militia groups that is self-eviscerating.

 

[CaptainObvious]

I'm inclined to believe that what passes for a "militia" today doesn't exactly pass the sniff test, but then again, neither does BLM.