Ok, Let me explain it this way.
The snipers were not on the initial call. They were part of the hostage/crisis rescue team that gets called in AFTER things go tits up.
SO, the initial agents there showed up, fucked things up by not announcing themselves when they entered, then killing one of the sons who shot back in self defense because the FBI killed his dog, and this caused the rest of the family to freak out and start shooting back. Realizing that they fucked up, the agents on the ground call in the hostage/crisis rescue snipers.
When the snipers got there, the situation was already hours old. They were not told anything more than the family had killed FBI agents, and they were to presume everyone on the property armed and dangerous. That is what was told them, so that is what they went into the situation thinking.
Again, all of this came out in the trial. The sniper was acquitted of charges because the higher ups in charge of the case LIED to him and his team, and refused to give critical information that would have prevented him taking that shot the way he did.
So I ask you now, if you were the sniper, and you were not told the truth about the situation having arrived hours later, should you be held responsible? Or, should it be the leaders of the operation who decided to LIE and withhold critical information, then try to frame a subordinate for their fuck, who should have be the ones on trial? This is not a case of "just following orders". This was a deliberate attempt by those in charge to scapegoat a subordinate so they could escape justice.
In short, the people responsible for Ruby Ridge were not held accountable. Those are the people who we should be going after. Not the sniper. If you can't see that, then you have a twisted view of justice. That's not what this movement is about.