Terrorism-The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives.
Seems to fit.
Sedition might be easier and they will not either. Plenty of other charges that they can.
they are still terrorists. I wouldn't give them the satisfaction of calling them anything less.
they are engaged in armed sedition, not terrorism. It is a fine legal point.
and we should reserve words for when they actually apply
In this case, it does not.
18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy
If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, § 1, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 103322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)
judges, Indians, local residents and other ranchers that have voiced opposition. People there have been intimidated, a vast majority of the locals want them out.
But they have taken over a building and have not fired a shot. The feds are not close enoight to be shot. I think calling these idiots terrorists minimizes the terror caused by actual terrorists. That term is being thrown aroundd quite loosely on DU.
Right or left, its hyperbolic vitriol designed to demonize ones political enemies.
Be careful of your tactics, they may come back to bite you.