This is my hang up with the march. I think nonviolent, civil disobedience, of unconstitutional laws are a good political tool. HOWEVER, there is a line you must draw. DC has ridiculous penalties for this stuff. It's a felony. You will be arrested. You won't be going to jail, you'll be going to prison. If the whole country had DC gun laws/penalties, then it'd be different.
There's other cities and states that this could be much more efficient in. As it stands now, do you think MSM and TPTB will really give those guys the coverage? Heck no. Obamas already got the orders out, I'm sure, to blackout te media, and throw these gun activists in prison.
Why not organize something huge in Texas? While you wouldn't be breaking a law, which I understand the point of civil disobedience, it would have the chance of being huge enough to garner attention. Ill tell you right now though, this march won't even be a blip on MSM.
if the police dont let them across the bridge into D.C. then the march is over they turn back around and disperse, its not as bad as everybody is making it sound.
There is nothing to protest in Texas for the very reason you stated. Texas doesn't need as much help as DC. Texas already *mostly* understands freedom. DC does not. Why protest against the people who are doing right? I could see your point if it was CT, NY, NJ, CA, or any of the other backwards ultra blue states.
The more tyranny and restrictions, the less we should organize and protest? So since I live in NY I should just surrender and move to Texas? How about I'd rather die than cede my piece of heaven to these assholes!
"There's a difference between civil disobedience...and an actual violation of the law."
within the rules, you are fine.
I feel someone is playing a Jedi mind trick on me.
How can you have disobedience AND stay within the rules? Talk about PC BS.
As to wether this is a good or bad idea?
The 2nd amendment does not give you the right to march wherever you please, with whoever you want whenver you want with loaded weapons. Imagine the chaos if people were just allowed to gather is groups of a few thousand with loaded weapons and go a marching.
But hey - if that is the plan - just please dont do it half assed - do it right - 100% balls to the wall.
For me, I hate going to the local club and shooting sporting clays - that many people in one group with guns makes me nervous - there are always a few knuckleheads everytime that dont point downrange, carry wrong, don't breach or dont have the bolt open(can't count to two and leave one in the chamber - or just think it is easier to load more than two) - and range officers that are not nearly as hard ass as they should be. And thats only a hundred or so people - never mind a few thousand.
I will ask this of Adam though:
As the CO of the company you are putting together, are you prepared to use any force necessary against any member of YOUR group who breaks ranks and does something provocative?
If one member unslings, and chambers - are you going to shoot them?
This is your "militia" and the job of the officer is to maintain order and discipline, not sure how to accomplish this with a group of total strangers - but good luck either way.
Hmm I feel someone is playing a Jedi mind trick on me.
I love this wit. Thanks for the smile :)
My name is pronounced like "see real". I code stuff for a living and for pleasure. I care quite a bit about language.
I think America should consider doing the same, and... ASAP!
concerning your statement about the 2nd amendment
""The 2nd amendment does not give you the right to march wherever you please, with whoever you want whenver you want with loaded weapons. Imagine the chaos if people were just allowed to gather is groups of a few thousand with loaded weapons and go a marching.""
where exactly does it state any of that?
or was it quoted from the cop?
i can see how if you weren't wanted on a premises the owner has the right to say GO
our founders carried theirs everywhere they went,as did most
cowboys,and the sign said leave your weapons at the door (owner)
is the term "algorithm",named after the man who created the internet?
within city limits. Which is what DC is saying(of course city limits used to be a wee bit smaller)
That is my point.
I am not sure what you are asking when you state "where exactly does it state any of that" - do you mean the 2A or Adams website?
According to Adam he is trying to get thousands of people to march - with loaded weapon slung over the shoulder. That is what I was refering too.
...although not a public one. Um, civil disobedience IS violating unjust/unconstitutional law! Civil disobedience in the early sixties was about violating Jim Crow LAW. Rosa Parks BROKE THE LAW by sitting at the front of the bus, remember that oh scawy police chief?
Alas, remember the shortest poem in the world: Balls. Adam had 'em.
“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
of the march is this .... This is my rifle- This is my gun
This one for fighting - This one for fun !
The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good things is my religion. Thomas Paine, Godfather of the American Revolution
I am not sure this is such a good idea, he is thinking all that will happen is that he will just get arrested. I hope he has this organized and thought out well, because if someone starts shooting from either side, people could end up dead. Those DC police are not going to back down.
But I think it is a bad idea. The reason being that this protest essentially consists of the gathering of 1000-1500 armed individuals who are not familiar with each other and putting them in a situation where they are directly confronting an opposing armed force that is there to disarm them. There are way too many variables and if this turns bloody it will turn public opinion against the 2nd amendment.
The smarter way to go about this would be to do it with a well-organized, disciplined militia. That is more in the spirit of the original intent of the 2nd amendment and you could have some hope of maintaining rational restraint if things get hairy.
If this turns bloody it will not turn me against my right to bear arms. What it will do is make me realize the government thugs that turned it bloody need to be hunted down as I will see their violent attack on a peaceful assembly as an act of war on the people and the constitution. If no one stands up and protects the rights of all people, who will be left to protect yours when they come for you. Agree with Adam or not, if we can't be armed and peacefully protest our government then what the hell is the point. Our founders started a revolution over far less. The government must fear the people before real progress can be made.
Liberty: Too big to fail
Adam and the protesters will be seen as the bad guys because they forced the issue and sought out an armed confrontation.
So if it turns bloody you plan on going rambo and hunting down government thugs? That sounds like a great idea. Let's just start killing people and liberty will spread. What if the first shot comes from the protesters (wether it be a provocateur or not)? We can't make any real progress until the people are united in purpose. Right now, a significant percentage of of the population supports gun control. The scenario you present is civil war. Have you been watching Syria? Absolutely no one wants that. I am all for civil disobedience. But we must be smart about it and we must try to stay peaceful with every possible effort we can muster.
If anything at all then a well regulated militia should be used.
Adam set the record of respect for the highest law of the land, and even respect for those in D.C. law enforcement who refuse to abide by it; by declaring that, though bearing their arms lawfully, the march would not force it's way past the bridge it they were refused entry into D.C.
By setting the record this early on, and by showing no previous harm; Kokesh has put debate on the value of this march into the national discussion, and put the D.C. police chief on notice to defend her position against an a peaceful protest march, that happens to bear arms lawfully, from crossing outside her jurisdiction, into it.
Since there is no likelihood that the march will be called off, it will keep this debate going on up until it happens. If the defenders of maintaining status quo, unconstitutional statutes continue to speak as this D.C. police chief did, the debate will already be won, long before the march has begun; and show everyone paying attention that though the district holds the original document, the U.S. Constitution is guarded by strangers to it's original intent and practical application, regardless of their oath towards its defense.
For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it. - Patrick Henry
love this^^^^^^, i did post this comment as a response to many naysayers.
As i have said, all the naysayers remind me of tories complaining about patriots protesting the british.
Ron Paul 2016
Rereading this post, I saw several typos that are reminders to me that hasty posts ought to be checked more carefully; especially when potentially reposted by others, as you've done.
Kind thanks for your agreement that tories need not be only witnessed in the past, but watched for in the present, eh?
can't control all variables of the march.
There can be agent provocateurs on either side or any number of things that go wrong. The type of people participating in such a march, following someone like Adam Kokesh, I doubt can be totally controlled.
the patriots couldn't control all the variables either against the british. I guess they should of quit because they couldn't control all the variables.
to have everyone leave their weapons at home if the police will do the same.
If not us than who?
The problem is that involvement in government doesn't work anymore. What we all saw when Ron ran is dirty tricks, rule changing, and physical violence to stop him winning. The only reason TPTB keep up the illusion of us peons having any effect on what the politicians do is that so many people are armed and would use those arms if they knew the truth. The true value of Ron's run was that it showed us the truth, that the people no longer have any say in the usual peaceful channels of petitions or running for office.
That's why when someone like Adam comes along and says let's *DO* something, people who realize the slavery we're in will get behind him because they want *something* to work. What Adam is proposing is no solution, because too much can go wrong, but the question remains: what can we do?
Looking at the Ghandi clip, it makes me think about the difference between what India was facing and what we are now facing. I think it might have made it easier for the Indians to organize against those of a different nationality, for starters. It was easier for them to find common ground about points of oppression. How many times here on DP do we bemoan those with neocon points of view that America can do no wrong when it comes to dealing with radical muslims, or that we should give up our freedoms to be safer from Al-Qaida. Look at all of our cultural points of division - the neocon view that government intrusion on marriage is okay if it forces the christian view of marriage on everyone vs. the liberal view that the courts should force everyone to accept same-sex marriage. The pro-life view that right to life extends from conception vs. the pro-abortion view that women and "doctors" get to make that decision. Look at our division on the right to freedom of association - "a private business should have the right to serve whom it pleases, and pay the consequences that the free-market deals it based on it's choices" vs. "the state should force businesses to serve or give jobs to black, white, woman, man, straight, homosexual, cross-dresser, transgender, christian, wiccan, muslim, etc., etc." Look at our division on the right for private citizens to bear arms vs. those who want everyone to give up guns and only let the police be armed. Look at our division on whether or not people should be forced to vaccinate, or fluoridate their water.
Ghandi was more assured that Indians could unite on points of oppression and thus be more successful at organizing resistance that would be effective because of sheer numbers.
How can we muster the numbers needed for peaceful resistance when we have so much more division among the oppressed about the points of oppression?
I think about the numbers at rallies for Ron during his campaign, and think some of the differences could be overcome if we just had more time. Time, however, is something we don't really have anymore. No time is going to force people to back something rash like what Adam is proposing.
I don't know what answer is out there that will be effective in the time allotted to us. All I know is that what Adam is proposing isn't it.
Michael, the Archangel, defend us in battle. Mary, Our Mother, protect us under your mantle.
But how powerless we are. That would be a stunning message in itself.
Currently consuming: Free Domain Radio; NE Patriots Football; Nintendo Wii
"get him to do civil disobedience the right way." wow this is Orwellian doublespeak at its finest. So now, from some clever phrasing, civil disobedience is redefined. They killed two birds with one stone. Doing something unlawful is now BEYOND civil disobedience (terrorism perhaps?), and simultaneously, doing something lawful, but inconvenient for officials, like exercising free speech, is now defined as civil disobedience. They never let a good crisis go to waste.
To all the nay-sayers out there, if you don't like it, just don't be a part of it. We shouldn't seek to be a unified colt, that is how THEY operate. Remember this: the Sons of Liberty (led by Samuel Adams) were key to the American revolution's success. They were the "radical" rebels, whom the intellectuals wanted to distance themselves from. But BOTH the intellectuals AND the radicals played important roles in the scheme of History, so even if you find yourself more comfortable with one style than the other, respect that both types are attacking the same problem from different angles, which in the long run will be most effective.
Just got through watching his interview with Alex Jones and I was impressed. I have not thought this would actually happen but Adam is inspired I can see it in his eyes and in the way he speaks and the astute logical and salient points he makes.
Yes this is extremely risky but what's the alternative? Continue to cower in fear and sit on our hands and watch tyranny engulf us entirely?
Adam has won me over this is the kind of boldness and leadership we need. If I can make it to DC I might march with him.
End The Fat
70 pounds lost and counting! Get in shape for the revolution!
Adam Kokesh's march into Washington DC with loaded firearms on the backs of the marchers is a very bad idea. It will be viewed by the media as an act of violence, even if that is not Kokesh's intention. Kokesh's intention won't make any difference to the media. The media will interpret the event to mean whatever they like - A reason to dispense with the 2nd Amendment.
Should there be any violence, it won't make any differnce who fires the first shot or threw the first punch. The media will blame whatever happens on the existence of the 2nd Amendment.
Those supporting the 2nd Amendment and wish to see it survive, should be against this march.
Certainly this march is drawing a great amount of publicity. The intentions are clear among libertarians. But the mainstream media will ignore those factors. The mainstream media will blow this event out of proportion and label it as violent revolution.
Mr. Kokesh, Please call off your march or take it to some other location than Washington DC.
Don't you think there are more people who support the 2nd amendment than not? It might inspire people. I hope so anyway. I'm not saying he should or shouldn't do it. I'm just trying to think positive. I do LOVE the fact that he dares to defy. If we had all done that generations ago we wouldn't be in this mess.
The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion.