Gun nuts plan armed march on DC; 7/4/13: Will U Attend?

[candycorn]

If not, why not?

A group of self-proclaimed anti-tyranny activists are planning to celebrate Independence Day by marching on Washington, D.C. while carrying loaded rifles on their backs—something that would clearly break D.C.'s strict gun laws the moment they stepped foot inside the district. What could possibly go wrong?

Well, for starters, they'll most likely be stopped on the Arlington Memorial Bridge by law enforcement officers. "If you're coming here to protest government policy, great," D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier said yesterday during one of her monthly appearances on local television. "If you're coming here to break law, we'll take action." She went on to lay out the most obvious outcome if organizers go through with the effort: "There’s a pretty good chance we’ll meet them on the D.C. side of the bridge." Her officers, it goes without saying, would themselves be armed, and would likely have backup from U.S. Park Police.
Adam Kokesh, the Iraq war veteran and Internet talk-show host who is organizing the as-yet unpermitted event, is hailing it as a display of civil disobedience. He notes on his personal website that he hopes to coordinate to some extent with D.C. law enforcement so that participants have a clear picture of what will—and won't—end in their arrest, at least in theory. But the law enforcement officials tell the Washington Post that they're not going to allow the armed marchers into D.C., period. So, given that the "open carry" march's main goal is to carry loaded rifles into the nation's capital, it's hard to see how the demonstration could go off as planned.

Obviously, the protest is looking to make a wider point beyond the participants' opposition to D.C.'s strict gun laws. About 2,500 people have signed up to participate, but not everyone will be armed, according to Kokesh. Here's what he wrote about what he wants his protest to say, along with a hint about the best bet for a non-violent—yet, we're guessing, still publicity-heavy—outcome (CAPS-LOCK his; emphasis ours):

We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, & returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free. There’s a remote chance that there will be violence as there has been from government before, and I think it should be clear that if anyone involved in this event is approached respectfully by agents of the state, they will submit to arrest without resisting. We are truly saying in the SUBTLEST way possible that we would rather die on our feet than live on our knees.
It looks like that against all signs to the contrary, Kokesh is holding out hope that he and his fellow protesters will make it into the district. He writes that he wants police to "escort us on our route," in an exception to the law, or even participate in the march itself. Again, we don't see that happening.

Sounds like its right down some of ya'lls alley.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Do they have a right to march? If so then let them.

 

[LoudMcCloud]

2 threads on this already bud.

 

[TheOldSchool]

If not, why not?

A group of self-proclaimed anti-tyranny activists are planning to celebrate Independence Day by marching on Washington, D.C. while carrying loaded rifles on their backs—something that would clearly break D.C.'s strict gun laws the moment they stepped foot inside the district. What could possibly go wrong?

Well, for starters, they'll most likely be stopped on the Arlington Memorial Bridge by law enforcement officers. "If you're coming here to protest government policy, great," D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier said yesterday during one of her monthly appearances on local television. "If you're coming here to break law, we'll take action." She went on to lay out the most obvious outcome if organizers go through with the effort: "There’s a pretty good chance we’ll meet them on the D.C. side of the bridge." Her officers, it goes without saying, would themselves be armed, and would likely have backup from U.S. Park Police.
Adam Kokesh, the Iraq war veteran and Internet talk-show host who is organizing the as-yet unpermitted event, is hailing it as a display of civil disobedience. He notes on his personal website that he hopes to coordinate to some extent with D.C. law enforcement so that participants have a clear picture of what will—and won't—end in their arrest, at least in theory. But the law enforcement officials tell the Washington Post that they're not going to allow the armed marchers into D.C., period. So, given that the "open carry" march's main goal is to carry loaded rifles into the nation's capital, it's hard to see how the demonstration could go off as planned.

Obviously, the protest is looking to make a wider point beyond the participants' opposition to D.C.'s strict gun laws. About 2,500 people have signed up to participate, but not everyone will be armed, according to Kokesh. Here's what he wrote about what he wants his protest to say, along with a hint about the best bet for a non-violent—yet, we're guessing, still publicity-heavy—outcome (CAPS-LOCK his; emphasis ours):

We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, & returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free. There’s a remote chance that there will be violence as there has been from government before, and I think it should be clear that if anyone involved in this event is approached respectfully by agents of the state, they will submit to arrest without resisting. We are truly saying in the SUBTLEST way possible that we would rather die on our feet than live on our knees.
It looks like that against all signs to the contrary, Kokesh is holding out hope that he and his fellow protesters will make it into the district. He writes that he wants police to "escort us on our route," in an exception to the law, or even participate in the march itself. Again, we don't see that happening.

Sounds like its right down some of ya'lls alley.

B/c the traffic will be awful. Seriously... try to drive in there that day. You'll want to just slit your wrists if it's like any other protest that happens here.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Isn't it cute how leftist fanatics who keep losing the gun argument, resort to duplicating existing threads just so they can put their namecalling and smears into the title?

 

[Politico]

You hate guns we get it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If not, why not?

A group of self-proclaimed anti-tyranny activists are planning to celebrate Independence Day by marching on Washington, D.C. while carrying loaded rifles on their backs—something that would clearly break D.C.'s strict gun laws the moment they stepped foot inside the district. What could possibly go wrong?

Well, for starters, they'll most likely be stopped on the Arlington Memorial Bridge by law enforcement officers. "If you're coming here to protest government policy, great," D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier said yesterday during one of her monthly appearances on local television. "If you're coming here to break law, we'll take action." She went on to lay out the most obvious outcome if organizers go through with the effort: "There’s a pretty good chance we’ll meet them on the D.C. side of the bridge." Her officers, it goes without saying, would themselves be armed, and would likely have backup from U.S. Park Police.
Adam Kokesh, the Iraq war veteran and Internet talk-show host who is organizing the as-yet unpermitted event, is hailing it as a display of civil disobedience. He notes on his personal website that he hopes to coordinate to some extent with D.C. law enforcement so that participants have a clear picture of what will—and won't—end in their arrest, at least in theory. But the law enforcement officials tell the Washington Post that they're not going to allow the armed marchers into D.C., period. So, given that the "open carry" march's main goal is to carry loaded rifles into the nation's capital, it's hard to see how the demonstration could go off as planned.

Obviously, the protest is looking to make a wider point beyond the participants' opposition to D.C.'s strict gun laws. About 2,500 people have signed up to participate, but not everyone will be armed, according to Kokesh. Here's what he wrote about what he wants his protest to say, along with a hint about the best bet for a non-violent—yet, we're guessing, still publicity-heavy—outcome (CAPS-LOCK his; emphasis ours):

We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, & returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free. There’s a remote chance that there will be violence as there has been from government before, and I think it should be clear that if anyone involved in this event is approached respectfully by agents of the state, they will submit to arrest without resisting. We are truly saying in the SUBTLEST way possible that we would rather die on our feet than live on our knees.
It looks like that against all signs to the contrary, Kokesh is holding out hope that he and his fellow protesters will make it into the district. He writes that he wants police to "escort us on our route," in an exception to the law, or even participate in the march itself. Again, we don't see that happening.

Sounds like its right down some of ya'lls alley.

This guy was the darling of the left when Bush was president, why do you hate him now?

 

[Capstone]

The whole story reeks of an agenda-driven incitement to disarmament.

Ask yourselves: which agenda would benefit more from an armed conflict between law enforcement officials and civilian protesters: the pro-2nd Amendment people, or the anti-gun crowd?

The answer might just reveal who's really behind the stupid idea.

 

[Capstone]

Hopefully, some high profile pro-gun people will have the foresight to LOUDLY condemn the idea ...before it's too late.

 

[buckeye45_73]

I'm sure more we'll be there than the gun control rally..ie the pro criminal rally

 

[ScienceRocks]

I'm sure more we'll be there than the gun control rally..ie the pro criminal rally

These people are pro-criminal and anti-first world civilization. Seriously, these fuckers are working on turning us into a very violent third world shit hole.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Hopefully, some high profile pro-gun people will have the foresight to LOUDLY condemn the idea ...before it's too late.

Quite a few have, you just weren't paying attention.

 

[editec]

IF 2nd Amendment advocates truly want to see the American people lose sympathy for their arguments in favor of gun rights?

Sending thousands of armed 2nd Amendment advocates to Washington locked and loaded, is the best possible way to do it.

 

[Capstone]

Hopefully, some high profile pro-gun people will have the foresight to LOUDLY condemn the idea ...before it's too late.

Quite a few have, you just weren't paying attention.

Nope, it's just that they weren't quite LOUD enough to be heard.

I want to see Alex Jones and The Nuge on Piers Morgan's show again -- condemning the stupid ass idea before a 'mainstream' audience!

 

[PredFan]

If not, why not?

A group of self-proclaimed anti-tyranny activists are planning to celebrate Independence Day by marching on Washington, D.C. while carrying loaded rifles on their backs—something that would clearly break D.C.'s strict gun laws the moment they stepped foot inside the district. What could possibly go wrong?

Well, for starters, they'll most likely be stopped on the Arlington Memorial Bridge by law enforcement officers. "If you're coming here to protest government policy, great," D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier said yesterday during one of her monthly appearances on local television. "If you're coming here to break law, we'll take action." She went on to lay out the most obvious outcome if organizers go through with the effort: "There’s a pretty good chance we’ll meet them on the D.C. side of the bridge." Her officers, it goes without saying, would themselves be armed, and would likely have backup from U.S. Park Police.
Adam Kokesh, the Iraq war veteran and Internet talk-show host who is organizing the as-yet unpermitted event, is hailing it as a display of civil disobedience. He notes on his personal website that he hopes to coordinate to some extent with D.C. law enforcement so that participants have a clear picture of what will—and won't—end in their arrest, at least in theory. But the law enforcement officials tell the Washington Post that they're not going to allow the armed marchers into D.C., period. So, given that the "open carry" march's main goal is to carry loaded rifles into the nation's capital, it's hard to see how the demonstration could go off as planned.

Obviously, the protest is looking to make a wider point beyond the participants' opposition to D.C.'s strict gun laws. About 2,500 people have signed up to participate, but not everyone will be armed, according to Kokesh. Here's what he wrote about what he wants his protest to say, along with a hint about the best bet for a non-violent—yet, we're guessing, still publicity-heavy—outcome (CAPS-LOCK his; emphasis ours):

We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, & returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free. There’s a remote chance that there will be violence as there has been from government before, and I think it should be clear that if anyone involved in this event is approached respectfully by agents of the state, they will submit to arrest without resisting. We are truly saying in the SUBTLEST way possible that we would rather die on our feet than live on our knees.
It looks like that against all signs to the contrary, Kokesh is holding out hope that he and his fellow protesters will make it into the district. He writes that he wants police to "escort us on our route," in an exception to the law, or even participate in the march itself. Again, we don't see that happening.

Sounds like its right down some of ya'lls alley.

No, I won't be attending. My family always has a 4th of July party on the river. Wouldn't miss that for anything.

 

[PredFan]

NRA sponsored 2nd Amendment rally in Texas a little while ago, with thousands of armed Americans: Zero shootings.

Marijuanna legalization rally recently, 3 deaths.

 

[Wildman]

I'm sure more we'll be there than the gun control rally..ie the pro criminal rally

These people are pro-criminal and anti-first world civilization. Seriously, these fuckers are working on turning us into a very violent third world shit hole.

These people you do mean the liarberals of the U.S.A. right ???

 

[AmericanFirst]

If not, why not?

A group of self-proclaimed anti-tyranny activists are planning to celebrate Independence Day by marching on Washington, D.C. while carrying loaded rifles on their backs—something that would clearly break D.C.'s strict gun laws the moment they stepped foot inside the district. What could possibly go wrong?

Well, for starters, they'll most likely be stopped on the Arlington Memorial Bridge by law enforcement officers. "If you're coming here to protest government policy, great," D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier said yesterday during one of her monthly appearances on local television. "If you're coming here to break law, we'll take action." She went on to lay out the most obvious outcome if organizers go through with the effort: "There’s a pretty good chance we’ll meet them on the D.C. side of the bridge." Her officers, it goes without saying, would themselves be armed, and would likely have backup from U.S. Park Police.
Adam Kokesh, the Iraq war veteran and Internet talk-show host who is organizing the as-yet unpermitted event, is hailing it as a display of civil disobedience. He notes on his personal website that he hopes to coordinate to some extent with D.C. law enforcement so that participants have a clear picture of what will—and won't—end in their arrest, at least in theory. But the law enforcement officials tell the Washington Post that they're not going to allow the armed marchers into D.C., period. So, given that the "open carry" march's main goal is to carry loaded rifles into the nation's capital, it's hard to see how the demonstration could go off as planned.

Obviously, the protest is looking to make a wider point beyond the participants' opposition to D.C.'s strict gun laws. About 2,500 people have signed up to participate, but not everyone will be armed, according to Kokesh. Here's what he wrote about what he wants his protest to say, along with a hint about the best bet for a non-violent—yet, we're guessing, still publicity-heavy—outcome (CAPS-LOCK his; emphasis ours):

We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, & returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free. There’s a remote chance that there will be violence as there has been from government before, and I think it should be clear that if anyone involved in this event is approached respectfully by agents of the state, they will submit to arrest without resisting. We are truly saying in the SUBTLEST way possible that we would rather die on our feet than live on our knees.
It looks like that against all signs to the contrary, Kokesh is holding out hope that he and his fellow protesters will make it into the district. He writes that he wants police to "escort us on our route," in an exception to the law, or even participate in the march itself. Again, we don't see that happening.

Sounds like its right down some of ya'lls alley.

I have to work, unfortunately. Communism is right down your alley, commie idiot.

 

[Redfish]

If not, why not?

A group of self-proclaimed anti-tyranny activists are planning to celebrate Independence Day by marching on Washington, D.C. while carrying loaded rifles on their backs—something that would clearly break D.C.'s strict gun laws the moment they stepped foot inside the district. What could possibly go wrong?

Well, for starters, they'll most likely be stopped on the Arlington Memorial Bridge by law enforcement officers. "If you're coming here to protest government policy, great," D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier said yesterday during one of her monthly appearances on local television. "If you're coming here to break law, we'll take action." She went on to lay out the most obvious outcome if organizers go through with the effort: "There’s a pretty good chance we’ll meet them on the D.C. side of the bridge." Her officers, it goes without saying, would themselves be armed, and would likely have backup from U.S. Park Police.
Adam Kokesh, the Iraq war veteran and Internet talk-show host who is organizing the as-yet unpermitted event, is hailing it as a display of civil disobedience. He notes on his personal website that he hopes to coordinate to some extent with D.C. law enforcement so that participants have a clear picture of what will—and won't—end in their arrest, at least in theory. But the law enforcement officials tell the Washington Post that they're not going to allow the armed marchers into D.C., period. So, given that the "open carry" march's main goal is to carry loaded rifles into the nation's capital, it's hard to see how the demonstration could go off as planned.

Obviously, the protest is looking to make a wider point beyond the participants' opposition to D.C.'s strict gun laws. About 2,500 people have signed up to participate, but not everyone will be armed, according to Kokesh. Here's what he wrote about what he wants his protest to say, along with a hint about the best bet for a non-violent—yet, we're guessing, still publicity-heavy—outcome (CAPS-LOCK his; emphasis ours):

We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, & returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free. There’s a remote chance that there will be violence as there has been from government before, and I think it should be clear that if anyone involved in this event is approached respectfully by agents of the state, they will submit to arrest without resisting. We are truly saying in the SUBTLEST way possible that we would rather die on our feet than live on our knees.
It looks like that against all signs to the contrary, Kokesh is holding out hope that he and his fellow protesters will make it into the district. He writes that he wants police to "escort us on our route," in an exception to the law, or even participate in the march itself. Again, we don't see that happening.

Sounds like its right down some of ya'lls alley.

NO, but I will have my legal concealed carry weapon with me whatever I do on July 4th

 

[Little-Acorn]

Hopefully, some high profile pro-gun people will have the foresight to LOUDLY condemn the idea ...before it's too late.

Quite a few have, you just weren't paying attention.

Nope, it's just that they weren't quite LOUD enough to be heard.

They will never be loud enough to be heard, until and unless the media publish what they say and broadcast it all over, as they have the Jodie Arias trial and the latest doings of whichever Kardashian.

And the media will never, ever do that for gun owners who don't want their rights violated.