Gun Protesters Plan March On D.C. With Loaded Rifles To ‘Put Government On Notice'

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I don't want him to be anything, I am pointing out he is not what he says he is.

There is a difference between being anti-war libertarian who believes bases his philosophy on voluntaryism/non aggression and someone who defaces property.

Antiwar Protesters Arrested in Push to Post Signs

Putting signs on so-called "public" property is not defacing property. There is no basis to claim Kokesh is a progressive.

Why was he charged with defacing property if it is not defacing property?

He was charged with defacing property because the regime doesn't like to be challenged on the legal fiction known as "public" property.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

By Rebecca Leber

Almost 900 people are RSVPed for a July 4th march on Washington, D.C. where protesters plan to carry loaded rifles. In D.C., openly carrying guns is against the law. But the organizer of the event, libertarian radio host Adam Kokesh, says the march is an act of “civil disobedience” that attempts to prove gun advocates’ point in the “SUBTLEST way possible.”

The event’s Facebook invitation describes the march as a nonviolent demonstration, “unless the government chooses to make it violent”:

This is an act of civil disobedience, not a permitted event. 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.​

More: Gun Protesters Plan March On Washington With Loaded Rifles To 'Put The Government On Notice'

I'm sure Obama will have an adequate military/police force waiting for these radical gun clowns. When I think of "civil disobedience" - I think of brave unarmed civil rights heroes like Martin Luther King, Jr. and Ghandi.

I think of Thoreau, who wrote a book about it. But I agree. MLK and Ghandi believed in volume, not violence.

Adam Kokesh does not believe in violence either.

 

[LoudMcCloud]

"If they don't, we wont!" Armed March on Washington DC - YouTube

You have to watch this video. The guy basically says we wont get crazy if they dont.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

"If they don't, we wont!" Armed March on Washington DC - YouTube

You have to watch this video. The guy basically says we wont get crazy if they dont.

Sounds like an intelligent policy.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I will say this right now.

Anyone who marches in DC with a loaded weapon should be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

While I disagree with the draconian laws in DC, you don't change them by breaking them.

So blacks shouldn't have sat at the lunch counters and Rose Parks should have moved to the back of the bus?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"If they don't, we wont!" Armed March on Washington DC - YouTube

You have to watch this video. The guy basically says we wont get crazy if they dont.

Sounds like an intelligent policy.

Sounds like a publicity stunt.

 

[HomeInspect]

Bring it on, NRA nutters.

Any fuckin' time.

Because flares are scary.

The mindless think that anyone who supports the second ammendment is a "Gun Nutter" They can't see the real issue, which is government control.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You have to watch this video. The guy basically says we wont get crazy if they dont.

Sounds like an intelligent policy.

Sounds like a publicity stunt.

Well this is meant to be a giant march on Washington, D.C., whether that actually happens remains to be seen, so yeah, I'd say publicity stunt is exactly what it is.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I will say this right now.

Anyone who marches in DC with a loaded weapon should be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

While I disagree with the draconian laws in DC, you don't change them by breaking them.

So blacks shouldn't have sat at the lunch counters and Rose Parks should have moved to the back of the bus?

Yup, they all walked in with their glocks and their semi-automatic rifles.

No, the dopes have no right to be carrying loaded weapons on public property without proper permits.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Well this is meant to be a giant march on Washington, D.C., whether that actually happens remains to be seen, so yeah, I'd say publicity stunt is exactly what it is.

Problem is....

Most gun owners are employed. Leftist "marches" are put on by Unions. The "marchers" are paid, their transportation and lodging is paid, and have no repercussion from employers. Gun owners are actual workers, they don't have the public picking up the tab for this kind of shit. In addition, the use of LOADED weapons is stupid and dangerous, most gun owners are far too responsible to brandish a loaded weapon when their is no intent to discharge it.

So, this will be a bust.

 

[dilloduck]

Well this is meant to be a giant march on Washington, D.C., whether that actually happens remains to be seen, so yeah, I'd say publicity stunt is exactly what it is.

Problem is....

Most gun owners are employed. Leftist "marches" are put on by Unions. The "marchers" are paid, their transportation and lodging is paid, and have no repercussion from employers. Gun owners are actual workers, they don't have the public picking up the tab for this kind of shit. In addition, the use of LOADED weapons is stupid and dangerous, most gun owners are far too responsible to brandish a loaded weapon when their is no intent to discharge it.

So, this will be a bust.

I'll say---if they are busted it will most likely be a felony charge and they will lose their right to own a gun.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Well this is meant to be a giant march on Washington, D.C., whether that actually happens remains to be seen, so yeah, I'd say publicity stunt is exactly what it is.

Problem is....

Most gun owners are employed. Leftist "marches" are put on by Unions. The "marchers" are paid, their transportation and lodging is paid, and have no repercussion from employers. Gun owners are actual workers, they don't have the public picking up the tab for this kind of shit. In addition, the use of LOADED weapons is stupid and dangerous, most gun owners are far too responsible to brandish a loaded weapon when their is no intent to discharge it.

So, this will be a bust.

Regardless of the politics involved, these giant marches, and essentially civil disobedience in general, are inherently publicity stunts. They are stunts designed to generate publicity for a cause.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I will say this right now.

Anyone who marches in DC with a loaded weapon should be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

While I disagree with the draconian laws in DC, you don't change them by breaking them.

So blacks shouldn't have sat at the lunch counters and Rose Parks should have moved to the back of the bus?

Two different issues altogether.

With regard to the lunch counter protests, for example, there were no laws broken, no trespass manifested, no property rights violated, law enforcement simply took it upon itself to arrest the protesters because the restaurant owner refused to serve them. See, e.g., Garner v. Louisiana (1961).

Openly carrying loaded firearms in a jurisdiction where such an act is illegal, however, indeed exposes one to warranted arrest and prosecution.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Well this is meant to be a giant march on Washington, D.C., whether that actually happens remains to be seen, so yeah, I'd say publicity stunt is exactly what it is.

Problem is....

Most gun owners are employed. Leftist "marches" are put on by Unions. The "marchers" are paid, their transportation and lodging is paid, and have no repercussion from employers. Gun owners are actual workers, they don't have the public picking up the tab for this kind of shit. In addition, the use of LOADED weapons is stupid and dangerous, most gun owners are far too responsible to brandish a loaded weapon when their is no intent to discharge it.

So, this will be a bust.

You are a reactionary dope, period. What a stupid ass comment. Where are your figures supporting your assertion. You have none.

 

[AVG-JOE]

To put government on notice? What does that mean, exactly? Is that a civil war hint?

If the definition of 'government' around here remains "We, The People"...

Do you feel notified?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Well this is meant to be a giant march on Washington, D.C., whether that actually happens remains to be seen, so yeah, I'd say publicity stunt is exactly what it is.

Problem is....

Most gun owners are employed. Leftist "marches" are put on by Unions. The "marchers" are paid, their transportation and lodging is paid, and have no repercussion from employers. Gun owners are actual workers, they don't have the public picking up the tab for this kind of shit. In addition, the use of LOADED weapons is stupid and dangerous, most gun owners are far too responsible to brandish a loaded weapon when their is no intent to discharge it.

So, this will be a bust.

Regardless of the politics involved, these giant marches, and essentially civil disobedience in general, are inherently publicity stunts. They are stunts designed to generate publicity for a cause.

‘Gun marches’ are publicity stunts in that the motive is devoid of good faith, there is no ‘noble cause’ advocated; the motive is insincere, contrived, and designed to stifle debate, not promote it. Indeed, the participants have no intent of going through with the ‘protest’ whatsoever, knowing they’ll be arrested and likely convicted.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Well this is meant to be a giant march on Washington, D.C., whether that actually happens remains to be seen, so yeah, I'd say publicity stunt is exactly what it is.

Problem is....

Most gun owners are employed. Leftist "marches" are put on by Unions. The "marchers" are paid, their transportation and lodging is paid, and have no repercussion from employers. Gun owners are actual workers, they don't have the public picking up the tab for this kind of shit. In addition, the use of LOADED weapons is stupid and dangerous, most gun owners are far too responsible to brandish a loaded weapon when their is no intent to discharge it.

So, this will be a bust.

I'll say---if they are busted it will most likely be a felony charge and they will lose their right to own a gun.

Like that's a deterrent to having guns in this country...

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Problem is....

Most gun owners are employed. Leftist "marches" are put on by Unions. The "marchers" are paid, their transportation and lodging is paid, and have no repercussion from employers. Gun owners are actual workers, they don't have the public picking up the tab for this kind of shit. In addition, the use of LOADED weapons is stupid and dangerous, most gun owners are far too responsible to brandish a loaded weapon when their is no intent to discharge it.

So, this will be a bust.

Regardless of the politics involved, these giant marches, and essentially civil disobedience in general, are inherently publicity stunts. They are stunts designed to generate publicity for a cause.

‘Gun marches’ are publicity stunts in that the motive is devoid of good faith, there is no ‘noble cause’ advocated; the motive is insincere, contrived, and designed to stifle debate, not promote it. Indeed, the participants have no intent of going through with the ‘protest’ whatsoever, knowing they’ll be arrested and likely convicted.

Maybe they do, maybe they don't. It's certainly easy to sign up for something on Facebook and fail to follow through, however. Regardless, that you see this as being "devoid of good faith," and without a "noble cause," and designed to stifle debate is only based on the fact that you disagree with this march politically as far as I can tell.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Putting signs on so-called "public" property is not defacing property. There is no basis to claim Kokesh is a progressive.

Why was he charged with defacing property if it is not defacing property?

He was charged with defacing property because the regime doesn't like to be challenged on the legal fiction known as "public" property.

The property in question belongs to a utility, which is a corporation, which makes it real property, even if the government calls it public property. Posting signs on it was a violation of the property rights of that corporation, public or private, and a violation of the non aggression principle, which is what a voluntaryist is supposed to be all about. Yet you want to keep insisting that, because he says the right things in public, that his public actions can be ignored because you believe there is no such thing as public property.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Why was he charged with defacing property if it is not defacing property?

He was charged with defacing property because the regime doesn't like to be challenged on the legal fiction known as "public" property.

The property in question belongs to a utility, which is a corporation, which makes it real property, even if the government calls it public property. Posting signs on it was a violation of the property rights of that corporation, public or private, and a violation of the non aggression principle, which is what a voluntaryist is supposed to be all about. Yet you want to keep insisting that, because he says the right things in public, that his public actions can be ignored because you believe there is no such thing as public property.

Utilities are hardly private entities. Now if he were posting his flyers on, say, a McDonald's, I'd say you had a point.