Open act of civil disobedience in DC on July 4th....

[87iroc]

It's probably not going to happen. Adam has said he'll only do it if he gets 1K people committed to it. Doubt there are 1000 gun owners that will take the chance. They're a fairly "conservative" bunch, all in all. I doubt he'll get more than the 2 or 300 already signed up. Here's the invitation to the event. And some choice words from Adam on gun seizures. No wonder the "conservative" websites are going ape crap over this event.

This is from a Tweet from Adam.


Wonder how the DC police, NatGuard and Other federal police will take it?

I assume you've volunteered to be one of the 1000?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[Mark 1911]

This sounds like a recipe for disaster. Someone needs to pump the brakes on this pronto.

I agree. Recipe for disaster, all the ingredients are there. I hope we don't find ourselves with another Kent State on our hands. If something like this were to blow up, it wouldn't help our cause. Like you, my gut feeling is that this is a bad idea. I really do hope I'm wrong.

 

[indykid]

Two groups with loaded weapons, and opposing viewpoints, one provoking, and the other must confront given that act is illegal. No way this is a good idea.

While I believe in peaceful civil disobedience, the above quote reminds me of a date in history, April 19, 1775. A date when a group with loaded weapons confronted another group. Many gave their lives for the freedoms we now seem to have to fight for again to restore.

I prefer to do it at the ballot box, but there are many people afraid that we will not make it to the next election, hence this proposed march on Washington. I pray cool heads prevail and this doesn't turn into the next "shot heard 'round the world".

 

[mrjarrell]

I assume you've volunteered to be one of the 1000?

Nope. I already have plans for the 4th and they don't include going to prison. I've carried in DC, when I lived in No. Virginia. OC is not the way to go. I wish Adam the best of luck, but I don't see this going off the way he'd like. If he had a few thousand people, it might make a difference.

 

[ModernGunner]

"Civil disobedience" is ALWAYS viewed by those outside the 'protest' as an act of lunacy, and stupidity. Scumbag terrorist Bill Ayers is a perfect example. It is NOT how laws are changed or upheld in the U.S.A.

If 'you' (whomever) believe something is a 'bad law', then you campaign diligently and tirelessly to garner support and supporters for your ideals and get the law changed. You don't march on Washington, D.C. armed.

No LEO or military member, current OR former, could agree to participate without violating the very oath they took, thus being portrayed as a traitor to the very principles they swore to protect.

For the poster that included the quotation from Martin Luther King, Jr., I would remind him that, while King's 'marches' and rhetorical speeches made him a martyr, it ALSO didn't turn out very well for King.

This proposed march is NOT an act of 'civil disobedience', by any measure. It's an act of breaking the law and creating an armed confrontation between lawbreakers and Police, and possibly the National Guard. This leaves the D.C. Police, etc. NO option other than meeting Kokesh's group with a fully armed defense.

This proposal would ONLY benefit Obama, Feinstein, and the gun-grabbers.

 

[jwh20]

Not sure how I feel about this one...knowingly carrying weapons into an area that its outlawed to open carry in. I presume that CC is illegal in DC(I find that hard to believe even having a loaded gun on your person would be legal there... but don't have time to look it up right now)

Radio Host to Lead Armed March on DC July 4th 'To Put Gov't on Notice that We Won't be Intimidated' | CNS News

Civil disobedience is an American tradition from the beginnings our our nation. But you will certainly put yourself in jeopardy of being arrested, charged, prosecuted, and possibly convicted.

But that's the entire point of civil disobedience isn't it. You are making yourself a "test case" for the courts. Your argument is "this law is unconstitutional and so I am not guilty of a crime." You don't argue the facts, you argue the constitutionality.

The drawback, of course, is that this takes a lot of time and money and you are at the mercy of a court, presumably and ultimately the SCOTUS to agree that your position on the constitutionality of that law is also theirs.

Of course it's vitally important that you don't break any "constitutional" laws in the process.

I really hoped that Mr. Gregory from NBC News had been charged with illegal possession of that 30 round magazine. Not because I wanted to see him get what was coming to him (although that would have been nice!) but because I am sure that he'd have fallen back on some constitutional argument to that law. So in typical liberal fashion, he'd be arguing out of both sides of his twisted mouth.

If these folks actually do this, I certainly hope their behavior is "civil" and if the police do attempt to arrest them, it will be very interesting indeed. If I had to guess, however, I'll bet the police are under orders to allow them as long as they are "civil" because there is a lot at stake here for the anti-gun clowns in DC. I think they are not all that sure of their legal position in light of the recent Heller and McDonald decisions. So to help these people make a perfect "test case" by arresting a pack of "open carriers" who are otherwise lawful would be pretty stupid indeed! (But then nobody ever accused DC politicians of being all that smart - so just about anything could happen...)

 

[mbills2223]

MLK Jr, Ceasar Chavez, Women's sufferage, and a number of others did the same, however, they did not do so armed. I sorry, that ups the ante significantly. Two groups with loaded weapons, and opposing viewpoints, one provoking, and the other must confront given that act is illegal. No way this is a good idea.

Only one group is armed in most examples, and that's the authorities. I thought we as a gun community believed that guns made us safer. Do you not trust gun owners to keep their fingers off the trigger? I can't think of any other act of civil disobedience in regards to gun laws that could send nearly as powerful a message.

Civil disobedience is never a good idea, if you're looking at it from the perspective of getting in trouble, hurt, etc., but it's ALWAYS a good idea if you're looking at it from the viewpoint of gaining or maintaining freedom.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

"Civil disobedience" is ALWAYS viewed by those outside the 'protest' as an act of lunacy, and stupidity. Scumbag terrorist Bill Ayers is a perfect example. It is NOT how laws are changed or upheld in the U.S.A.

No LEO or military member, current OR former, could agree to participate without violating the very oath they took, thus being portrayed as a traitor to the very principles they swore to protect.

This proposed march is NOT an act of 'civil disobedience', by any measure. It's an act of breaking the law and creating an armed confrontation between lawbreakers and Police, and possibly the National Guard. This leaves the D.C. Police, etc. NO option other than meeting Kokesh's group with a fully armed defense.

There is a difference between peaceful civil disobedience and terrorism. It's pretty simple actually.

Why can't they? They have sworn to uphold the laws correct? The Constitution is the highest law of the land and per the Supreme Court, and law that goes against the Constitution is no law at all.

And yes it is an act of civil disobedience, civil disobedience almost by definition includes breaking the law. Such as Rosa Park, she broke the law. Or the Woolworth 4. They were told to leave and refused, thereby committing trespass. Were those acts of civil disobedience?

 

[apfroggy0408]

Hopefully this place out well for everyone involved.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Dominic: What do you think will happen?
Finch: What usually happens when people without guns stand up to people *with* guns.
— V for Vendetta

How else are you to stand up to people with guns, than to have guns of your own?

 

[GunnerDan]

And the Kent State students were killed by whom? I'm pointing this out because you solely indicated "DC Police."

The National guard murderers are the one's who murdered the Kent State students, but do you really think that the DC police would hesitate for one second to open fire murdering innocent people?

Gunner

 

[Denny347]

This is GREAT!!!!! So how many INGOers should I pencil in as attending? I mean with all the tough talk one would hope people put their money where their mouth is. My money is on ZERO.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Zero, dude.

It was a bad idea when Linda Thompson was talking about it in the mid-90s, it is STILL a bad idea.

If you want to "do something", sit down, write a check to NRA-ILA, upgrade your membership and write your elected representatives.

Organize so you do not have to march.

 

[GunnerDan]

Zero, dude.

It was a bad idea when Linda Thompson was talking about it in the mid-90s, it is STILL a bad idea.

If you want to "do something", sit down, write a check to NRA-ILA, upgrade your membership and write your elected representatives.

Organize so you do not have to march.

Kirk,

You know as well as me and everyone else that writing a check, contacting your elected officials, etc does NOTHING at all. Our elected officials do nothing that their constituents want only what they want. I guess Rosa Parks should have just wrote her elected officials?

Gunner

 

[jgreiner]

Not sure how I feel about this one...knowingly carrying weapons into an area that its outlawed to open carry in. I presume that CC is illegal in DC(I find that hard to believe even having a loaded gun on your person would be legal there... but don't have time to look it up right now)

Radio Host to Lead Armed March on DC July 4th 'To Put Gov't on Notice that We Won't be Intimidated' | CNS News

DC has long violated the 2nd amendment.

 

[Sgtusmc]

How much you wanna bet Adam gets nabbed by the GOV before this even goes down.

 

[ViperJock]

It wouldn't surprise me to see NRA members arrayed against him for doing something they should have done decades ago.

That's just vindictive BS.

 

[mrjarrell]

That's just vindictive BS.

Nope, just an inconvenient truth. As we are seeing.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

You know as well as me and everyone else that writing a check, contacting your elected officials, etc does NOTHING at all. Our elected officials do nothing that their constituents want only what they want. I guess Rosa Parks should have just wrote her elected officials?

You know by writing checks and contacting our elected officials that we stopped Toomey-Manchin, right?

Rosa Parks was part of a larger, coordinated effort which used reason and argument. If and when the time is right for another Rosa (or Dick or Otis) it will not be in this manner.