Why Is It When Conservatives At The Bundy Ranch Point Guns At Police Officers They

How do I detect liberal or conservative bias in news sources?

You can see bias in a few different places. Some news media will be very open about their bias (“The Red Flag”, for example may be openly left wing). Mainstream media tends to be reasonably accurate in what they report, buth their bias will be in how they report it and what they do or don't report.For example, when Bernie Sanders went from an almost complete unknown to winning primaries against Hillary Clinton who seemed to be the most eminently qualified candidate in generations, the MSM seemed to focus on his losses rather than his shocking wins.When a black man, who was kicked out of every Black Lives Matter group he went to, went on a shooting rampage at a Dallas BLM event, many MSM reporters (especially to the right like FOX) just reported on the fact that he was Black, and tried to saddle BLM with blame for the shooting.When a bunch of (white) ranchers at Bundy Ranch ( Wikipedia) pointed guns at government agents and law enforcement, threatened their lives and even brought out a local sheriff at gunpoint to repudiate his responsibility to enforce the law and a lawsuit (that Bundy started and lost), Fox News hailed them as patriots and heroes. When a spokesperson from the Bundy ranch went to Las Vegas, murdered two police officers and wrapped their half-naked bodies in a Tea Party flag, their connection to the Bundy Ranch was downplayed. (compare this to BLM above)When a right-wing radicalized man ambushes sheriff’s deputies killing one and wounding 6, you may notice how little attention is paid to his radicalization. Consider how this would have been treated if he had been Muslim.Further to the right, you will see news organizations that push Trump’s 'Fake News Awards' , for MSM while ignoring completely fabricated articles further from the right.

Liberals, at what point ( if ever), would you genuinely consider violent resistance against an oppresive regime in your country?

First of all you’d have to define liberal. Liberalism is a centrist ideology, one that comfortably includes the Rockefeller clan, most of the bankers, nearly all economists and just about every person writing for The Economist on top of that. It ranges from mild leftism to mild conservatism but by definition liberals just aren't extremists.But with that being said liberalism also includes a strong identification with and support of institutions. They are into passing laws, writing regulations and arguing in well reasoned court briefs. There would therefore have to be a complete collapse of institutions for liberalism to be pushed to violence.More to the point though is liberalism, whether in the Solidarity movement in Poland, the Czech Charter 77 movement or the liberation movements in India and South Africa developed robust non violent responses to illegitimate state power. Here in this country, when civil society in the south became dominated by a violent, brutal state sponsored terrorism we call the KKK that controlled the police, courts, prisons and legislature it was a bunch of very brave lawyers working for the NAACP and rather middle of the road on most things ministers like Dr. King and military vets like Medgar Evers who brought that system down non-violently. The legacy of a free and independent India and Poland, the rainbow nation of South Africa, a unified Germany, a democratic Czech Republic and a prosperous United States that managed to defeat Jim Crow without a revolution show that non-violence has a particular power and applicability that should be the way to go. That's perhaps the greatest accomplishment of liberalism, along with the weekend.

How can the Second Amendment be used to protect citizens against tyranny if civilian weapons are impotent against the modern military?

Civilian weapons are not impotent against the modern military. The month-long Jewish uprising in Warsaw started with a few handguns and ultimately killed several hundred of the most powerful military of the time. Not much has changed.An unorganized and undisciplined army without a reliable source of supply is unlikely to defeat an organized, disciplined army with a reliable source of supply, particularly if the latter is determined to wipe out the former. The weapons themselves are far less important than the organization and resources.But not being able to win is not the same as being impotent.The mob at the Alamo held up the most powerful army in the Western Hemisphere for almost 2 weeks. The Mexican Army wasted all that time because the mob was a serious threat.If the tyrant is willing to kill everyone, citizen resistance is futile. But with all the citizens dead, who is the tyrant going to rule? What will be the tyranny’s source of revenue?Are bees impotent? They can’t win.

Were Jerad and Amanda Miller right wing, domestic terrorists?

A better description might be "Rebels without a Clue"(I would call them wing nuts, but that's not nice)Here they are at Occupy protests...They were asked to leave the Bundy ranch....  apparently, they were given money to GO AWAY...from Business Insider...###DeLemus said he only interacted with the pair for about 15 minutes, and they were not at the ranch for much more than one hour. DeLemus said it was clear Jerad Miller was "a little sketchy," neurotic, and "unsettling to be around," while his wife seemed rather "young and naive," like "anyone's sweet daughter."DeLemus said they had quit their respective jobs and traveled out to the Bundy ranch. The ranchers gave them money for food, gas, and hotel rooms when they sent them on their way, DeLemus said.###Read more: BUNDY SUPPORTER: I Remember The Alleged Las Vegas Cop Killers, And They Seemed 'Sketchy'Their "Manifesto" is at an 8th grade level, and nothing but cliches...http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com...Evidently, they were registered as Democrats.######There are people who drift from one political or social movement to another, looking for various things - meaning in their life,  "action" (fighting usually), salvation, a father figure, a way to make easy money. a higher status role (Grand Golden Keagle!) than they have at work, etc.Most organizations try to screen out the violent, crazy, and weird.I would not be surprised if they were asked to leave other groups.######Assigning a political philosophy to these people probably has as much validity as assign a political viewpoint to a 5th grader.These people are not the Unibomber or the guy in Norway. They are very stupid and dangerous kids, and they probably could be considered a mental health problem, or an employment problem.But saying that their actions are the result of political positions is going to be a stretch, since they appear to have little loyalty or understanding of political positions.  I expect they knew more about Kurt Cobain and Kim Kardashian than Karl Marx or F. A. Hayek