Posted on 05/05/2013 9:16:53 AM PDT by LD Jackson
I seldom post more than once per day, but I believe this warrants the occasion. I was doing my morning rounds of reading the news and blog posts I read almost every day and came across something that troubles me greatly. It has to do with the push for more gun control, restrictions on the 2nd Amendment and how gun owners are portrayed in the media.
If you have read Political Realities for any length of time, you should be aware of my stance on gun control. I do not believe it is a good thing, much less constitutional. I do not trust the liberal advocates of gun control and believe they will never be satisfied until the 2nd Amendment is legislated into non-relevancy. Call me paranoid, but that's how I feel.
Having said that, I do believe it falls on gun owners and other liberty-loving individuals in America to behave in responsibly. This is especially true in high-profile events where it is highly likely that the media will take the slightest misstep and portray it in a way that will not be to our advantage. Thus it is with the event that prompted me to write this post.
Salon - Libertarian activist and radio host Adam Kokesh is hoping to get 1,000 people to march on Washington on July 4 — armed with loaded rifles. The plan, launched with a Facebook group today, is to gather on the Virginia side of the Potomac, where gun laws are lax, and then march across the bridge with loaded rifles slung over their shoulders into the District, where openly carrying weapons is generally prohibited.Seriously? With all the bad press gun owners receive from the media, no matter if the press should be bad or not, does Adam Kokesh really believe this is a smart idea? At the risk of sounding like I am questioning his motives, I can't help but wonder if he is more interested in raising his profile to the public than anything else. If he really wants to help gun owners, conducting a march on Washington with loaded weapons is not the way to go. It is my honest opinion that such a march would leave his intentions, good, bad, or otherwise, far too open to interpretation by the media. Does anyone reading this really believe that interpretation would turn into anything good for gun owners? I think not and I have no problem believing gun control advocates are salivating at the possibilities such a march would provide.“This will be a non-violent event,” the Facebook group warns, “unless the government chooses to make it violent.” Already, over 200 people have said they’ll attend the march.
Hot Air - Showing up with a thousand (or even a few hundred) people openly carrying loaded weapons and marching toward the Capitol is not something that law enforcement is going to play around with, particularly when you announce it in advance. And they’re not going to allow the march to proceed “peacefully” either. Normally I’d write this off as a bad idea that wouldn’t gain widespread support, but the problem here is that it doesn’t need widespread support. It would really only take a few hundred really upset people to get it rolling. And even if most of them intend it to be peaceful, when the officials show up to arrest them, weapons drawn, you have the potential for disaster which Rick Moran foresees.There isn't a chance this will turn out to be good for our cause. It will be anything except that. The more research I do, the more I am convinced that Adam Kokesh is after publicity for his upcoming run for Congress, more so than helping the plight of gun owners who feel their 2nd Amendment rights are under attack. I believe we should take steps to distance ourselves from Kokesh and his ill-conceived march on Washington with loaded rifles. Preemptively, we should be making it known that responsible gun owners have nothing to do with this hot-headed, anti-war demonstrator who is masquerading as a conservative.
I believe the right should be exercised. A lot.
Such an event is fine at capitols in open carry states but trying it in DC is begging for bad press.
We hand wring all day while our rights are infringed. Let’s at least hand wring while we exercise our rights.
Bad press? How about a massacre.
This needs to be reserved for when you’re planning to use them, not when you’re simply saying “we will not be infringed”.
So long as no laws are broken, what is the problem?
And who the heck is being a hot head?
I reject that notion.
I don’t know about the politician and talk show host — never heard of him out here — but being civil and nice didn’t work with abortion and it isn’t going to preserve 2nd Amendment rights.
I like the idea of the march, but maybe they could use pitchforks instead. Would get the same point across, with loads of symbolism. Obama did threaten that there would be people marching with pitchforks, but he thought it would be in order to harm bankers.
LD Jackson is correct.
The planned march is a bad idea and will not advance the cause to defend our Second Amendment rights.
An armed march would only provide gun grabbers with a photo-op to portray us as kooks.
You mean like a Democrat?
That said, I believe in using Teddy Roosevelt's advice about speaking softly and carrying a big stick. There's no need to be demonstrative, but make all actions taken count - like at election time.
Well, laws would be broken. I think that's the intent. According to the article, they're going to assemble in VA, where what they would not be in violation, then cross into DC, where open loaded carry IS illegal.
Dear LD Jackson - It appear to this observer that someone it out of touch, does not know American history nor American practices nor American precedents.
viz:
http://news2.nnyln.net/ticonderoga-sentinel/search.html
RIFLES IN EVIDENCE
Chicago Witnesses Spectacle of
Armed Strike Breakers Protecting
Wagons....
Chicago May 2.—Chicago witnessed
today the spectacle of 1,000 nonunion
teamsters armed with Winchester rifles
protecting the wagons of the Employers’
Teaming company. Superintendent
Heed of the Employers’ Teaming
company “states that the rifles may
be carried without infraction of the
law. Chief of Police O’Neill said that
ho would make no attempt to remove
this bristling martial effect from Chicago’s
streets, saying:
“I will not seek to prevent what appears
to be legal. There is no law that
empowers me to prohibit men from
carrying unconcealed weapons, and I
will make no attempt to do so.
“I have seen many men carrying rifles
in the streets of Chicago, and I
never have been called on to molest
them, I could not interfere. I have
cautioned my men to warn all nonunion
and union men not to carry concealed
weapons, but in the matter of
rifles I am powerless.”
Wholesale importations of nonunion
men from St. Louis and the arrival of
Strike Breaker Farley from New York
have given a new turn to the strike.
Farley to Head Strike Breakers.
Immediately on his arrival Farley
held a conference wiih representatives
....
Every wagon sent by the Employers’
Teaming company is protected
by a rifle in the hands of the driver or
his assistant. Two thousand rifles were
ordered. together with ammunition
belt and distributed to the drivers.
The move has been carefully considered
anu the legal aspect looked into.
The officials of the Employers’ association
say they are acting under the
clause in the second amendment of the
federal constitution. which-.says. “The
right of the people to keep and bear
arms shall not be infringed.”
Under decisions of the United States
supreme court it is declared every man
has a right to protect his life or property
provided such arms are not concealed.”
You mean the Second Amendment isn’t about “The Sporting Use of Firearms”?
date: thurs may 4 1905
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
