The term "the government" is used as a scapegoat to create an imaginary adversary.  It was a person(s) who fired the weapon.  But that firing was not without justification because the person shot and other occupiers threatened with weapons.  If someone threatens me with a weapon, it's either me or them, and there is every justification for a threatened individual to shoot  someone threatening them.  In that instant there is no such thing as "the govt".  The wildlife refuge belongs to us all so is my land and your land.  A threat to our land is justification for defending that land.  This is patriotism. the other is terrorism for personal gain.  This was not a peaceful civil disobedience.  And tell me, how much chance would you give someone to prove they intend to use a gun they were carrying, perhaps leave your wife and children fatherless,  if they had threatened you and vowed to use it in a situation like the one we're discussing?