The Siege at Ruby Ridge

The following review reveals parts of the plot.

This movie showed that federal agents had what it took to shoot a 14-year-old boy in the back, gun down his pet dog, and snipe a woman holding a baby. The incident should sow "dissent" not the movie. If you can watch an incident like Ruby Ridge occur and still feel the system is great than you better take a good look at yourself.

Although Mr. Weaver and his family were extremists in some of their beliefs, they were and those of them that are still alive are still American citizens. And as such, they have certain inalienable rights. Rights wrongfully denied to them, such as trial by jury not a government death squad. In both real event and the movie, the federal agents illegally altered the rules of engagement and basically tried to avoid negotiations until they had to negotiate. They employed a shoot first and well there were no questions later. Being told that they "can and should shoot on sight any armed adult". There was no distinction made between armed adults walking around or armed adults pointing guns and federal agents. Just shoot on sight any armed adult.

However in the end justice was partly done in that Mr. Weaver and his friend were acquitted. Mr. weaver received roughly 3 million dollars in a settlement with the government. But those trigger-happy federal agents were never brought to justice.

Remember that federal agents have extensively more training when compared to local and state law enforcement agents. And as seen in the movie, federal not state or local law enforcement agents committed these heinous and atrocious acts. People with high levels of training, and they claim that they aren't to blame. They wrongfully and unconstitutionally altered rules of engagement. In essence declaring open season and giving their agents hunting licenses.

This movie or more so the criminal act committed by the government against the weavers shows/showed how much the government respects/ed its citizens and their alleged rights.