this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
218 points (97.4% liked)

News

38095 readers
1629 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
all 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Steve@communick.news 53 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

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.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 45 points 2 years ago (2 children)

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.

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So a militia, comprised of terrorists.... seems fair.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

I don't understand. Do you find that confusing?

Boiled down, "militia" doesn't mean much more than "group of non-soldiers organised in a soldier sort of way with the intention of doing soldier sort of things".

[–] Gigasser@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

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.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago

Call them terrorists. That's what they are.

[–] match@pawb.social 2 points 2 years ago

paramilitars

[–] LordCrom@lemmy.world 36 points 2 years ago (4 children)

So how about the cops do their fuckin jobs and go round up these people.

[–] Duckingold@lemmy.world 27 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2024/10/13/federal-officials-nc-temporarily-relocated-amid-report-armed-militia-email-shows/

[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Detained on a misdemeanor and released. It's also not clear whether these are two separate reports.

[–] Duckingold@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] Gerudo@lemm.ee 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Maybe some of them ARE cops.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago
[–] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

They can’t be threatening FEMA and helping them!!!

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 21 points 2 years ago (1 children)

How are those fuckers not in jail?

[–] SelfProgrammed@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Another article said this is wrong. There was one 44 yr old from Bothic that's been arrested but no militia... Yet.

https://apnews.com/article/fema-threats-disaster-workers-rutherford-county-armed-militia-dbb6b5727eaa12e79f307bf38a4b6256

[–] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Just to clarify, as far as I can tell, the trucks were reported by the National Guard to the US Forest Service who notified FEMA. The other was a call to a sheriff's office about a single individual. It's quite possible these are two actual but different things.

[–] Balthazar@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This is why we can't have nice things.

[–] d00phy@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

It really is. One of the reasons, anyway.