Comments by "" (@TheArklyte) on "ATF Starts Seizing FRT’s" video.

Why aren't they supposed to financially compensate the full cost of whatever they steal? It's not some random dude, who breaks into your house and then nobody can find him. Isn't a class lawsuit supposed to be used in such situations?
199
@TheDkb427 I didn't use the word seize because they can't seize them. Those items are still legal, there is no court decision that says otherwise yet, you can't seize it because it's called by another word. A series of words in fact. Stealing if done in secret, robbing if under threat and so on.
8
But it DOES disturb people outside of US.
5
@rustknuckleirongut8107 but it isn't illegal. They're seizing private property for whatever reason they've dreamed up. So isn't it closer to military requisition when they take your truck for example because it can haul tonnage above certain mark and they need them ASAP? Except military has reason.
4
Now that my YT stopped dying (because mobile version sucks for the last 4 years straight), let me elaborate a little bit. It DOES disturb people outside US. Because US just like Switzerland and Israel are one of the few examples of armed population not being a disaster. And unlike the other two, without military involvement. For a LOT of countries it is important as an example that can be used to argue in favor of certain legislations. The whole mess going on right now wouldn't be happening if Poland, Ukraine, Belarus and Russia had armed populace. So when US decides to have a nother brainfart and shoot itself in the leg it kind of DOES invalidate a certain line of arguments important to state with either authoritarian history or/and with insane neighbours. But here we instead have policy on "it's okay to arm 18 year old boys to kill other kids because we said so, but allowing guns for self defense is a big no-no". Worst part? Even after Putin, Lukashenko and so on, we'd still most likely not going to scrape back the right to bear arms from whichever state comes next.
1