Comment: Setting clear, lawful intentions vs fear of lawless reactions

(See in situ)


Setting clear, lawful intentions vs fear of lawless reactions

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.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass