Gun Protesters Plan March On Washington With Loaded Rifles To...

"Put the Government on Notice"

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 events 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.

Theres 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 is not exactly clear whether Kokesh will carry through with the event, since he says it needs to reach a critical mass of 10,000 RSVPs first. However, the National Rifle Association is newly reenergized after the Senate filibuster of background check legislation.

Salons Alex Seitz-Wald notes that Kokesh has expressed increasingly radical views on his show and on Twitter. Just this week, he called for the abolishment of the U.S. government.

Generally, open carry demonstrations have occurred in places with weaker gun laws, as well as a litmus test for how far gun violence laws can be challenged. Most recently, a group of menbrought their rifles to intimidate moms who rallied for action on gun violence. Another group brought guns into a Virginia public library full of children, while demonstrators in Oregonbrandished assault rifles in the State Capitol.

Source : http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/05/05/1965191/open-carry-washington-march/?mobile=nc

So OT, thoughts? Will any of you be joining these people?

This certainly will bring good publicity for gun-owners.

It sounds like they're not even sure what they're protesting Are they just bored or somethingJML897

It's a spontaneous gun show!

Paranoia goes a long way. Taking loaded weapons to DC, against the law, is not they way to do it.

It sounds like they're not even sure what they're protestingJML897

They don't, just another group of clueless people who clearly have their priorities straight.

Whats the point? Where is all this fear of guns being taken away coming from? Bane_09

There was that big NRA convention earlier this month, probably that.

I live a couple minutes from DC, not sure if I want to visit that day or not.:?

Hopefully neither side will do anything stupid.

[QUOTE="Bane_09"]Whats the point? Where is all this fear of guns being taken away coming from? THE_DRUGGIE

There was that big NRA convention earlier this month, probably that.

to an outside observer, americans must be out of their minds..comp_atkins

They don't look any better from the inside either.

Bunch of gun-toting morons defending an obsolete Amendment that should be deleted from the Constitution.

to an outside observer, americans must be out of their minds..comp_atkins

guns don't kill people.

radio nutcases that organize  armed marches in the nations capitol kill people.

This is stupid and makes responsible owners look bad. I understand their point but its unsafe. I'm very disappointed.

You can protest without carrying loaded rifles and most likely you'll be more effective.

Hopefully neither side will do anything stupid.

DanteSuikoden

A group of people walking around with Rifles in an apparent THREAT to opposition will bring nothing but more negativity upon these idiots.

So, I say go for it! Wave your silly guns around and build even more of a case against their banishment!

This certainly will bring good publicity for gun-owners.

jimkabrhel

It sounds like they're not even sure what they're protesting Are they just bored or somethingJML897

they won didn't they?  Is this a protest or a victory rally?

just to play the devils advocate here you have to admit all this attention on rifles is pretty stupid since rifles kill around 350 people a year on average while handguns kill around 6,500.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

and if this is really about the sanctity of human life or prevetable deaths or whatever why not go after the 25,000 that die per year from slip and fall injuries?

http://www.nsc.org/safety_home/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Falls/Pages/Falls.aspx

in the end everything is about some random bullshyt emotional argument that makes no logical sense.

oh no! 20 little white kids in north america die every few years from the actions of some nutcase that is impossible to legislate out of existence.

let's get in a big thing about it!

hey look over here at the 18,000 little kids that starve to death everyday! look at how easy it is to end it!

*crickets chirping*

Some 18,000 children die every day because of hunger and malnutrition and 850 million people go to bed every night with empty stomachs, a "terrible indictment of the world in 2007," the head of the U.N. food agency said.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-02-17-un-hunger_x.htm

life is silly isn't it?

[QUOTE="JML897"]It sounds like they're not even sure what they're protesting Are they just bored or somethingAudacitron

they won didn't they?  Is this a protest or a victory rally?

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

This certainly will bring good publicity for gun-owners.

lowkey254

100% sarcasm. It's an assinine idea coming from a truly fringe citizen.

[QUOTE="Audacitron"]

[QUOTE="JML897"]It sounds like they're not even sure what they're protesting Are they just bored or somethingJML897

they won didn't they?  Is this a protest or a victory rally?

Well, they are libertarians so I suspect that their objective is to disobey the government where they do not believe that it has legitimate authority. It's a symbolic protest to make the point that gun control is tyrannical. I agree with the notion but disagree with the method.

 

hey look over here at the 18,000 little kids that starve to death everyday! look at how easy it is to end it!

*crickets chirping*

Some 18,000 children die every day because of hunger and malnutrition and 850 million people go to bed every night with empty stomachs, a "terrible indictment of the world in 2007," the head of the U.N. food agency said.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-02-17-un-hunger_x.htm

life is silly isn't it?

 

Riverwolf007

just to play the devils advocate here you have to admit all this attention on rifles is pretty stupid since rifles kill around 350 people a year on average while handguns kill around 6,500.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

and if this is really about the sanctity of human life or prevetable deaths or whatever why not go after the 25,000 that die per year from slip and fall injuries?

http://www.nsc.org/safety_home/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Falls/Pages/Falls.aspx

in the end everything is about some random bullshyt emotional argument that makes no logical sense.

oh no! 20 little white kids in north america die every few years from the actions of some nutcase that is impossible to legislate out of existence.

let's get in a big thing about it!

hey look over here at the 18,000 little kids that starve to death everyday! look at how easy it is to end it!

*crickets chirping*

Some 18,000 children die every day because of hunger and malnutrition and 850 million people go to bed every night with empty stomachs, a "terrible indictment of the world in 2007," the head of the U.N. food agency said.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-02-17-un-hunger_x.htm

life is silly isn't it?

 

Riverwolf007

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

 

hey look over here at the 18,000 little kids that starve to death everyday! look at how easy it is to end it!

*crickets chirping*

Some 18,000 children die every day because of hunger and malnutrition and 850 million people go to bed every night with empty stomachs, a "terrible indictment of the world in 2007," the head of the U.N. food agency said.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-02-17-un-hunger_x.htm

life is silly isn't it?

 

comp_atkins

What does race and class have to do with anything? We naturally care more about the people of our society than those of other societies. Furthermore, the places where starvation is a real threat are also places where people have way too many children. They reproduce so much that it's no wonder that they are starving. I have a hard time feeling any pity for people who are their own worst enemy.

I'm having a really hard time understanding the goal of this protest. DaBrainz

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

just to play the devils advocate here you have to admit all this attention on rifles is pretty stupid since rifles kill around 350 people a year on average while handguns kill around 6,500.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

and if this is really about the sanctity of human life or prevetable deaths or whatever why not go after the 25,000 that die per year from slip and fall injuries?

http://www.nsc.org/safety_home/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Falls/Pages/Falls.aspx

in the end everything is about some random bullshyt emotional argument that makes no logical sense.

oh no! 20 little white kids in north america die every few years from the actions of some nutcase that is impossible to legislate out of existence.

let's get in a big thing about it!

hey look over here at the 18,000 little kids that starve to death everyday! look at how easy it is to end it!

*crickets chirping*

Some 18,000 children die every day because of hunger and malnutrition and 850 million people go to bed every night with empty stomachs, a "terrible indictment of the world in 2007," the head of the U.N. food agency said.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-02-17-un-hunger_x.htm

life is silly isn't it?

 

Ninja-Hippo

Too bad that didn't work in Germany and Norway among others. Yet in Switzerland where owning a firearm is much less restricted mass shooting never occur. The situation is also completely different between countries, races, and cultures. Comparing countries in this matter is silly.

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

 

hey look over here at the 18,000 little kids that starve to death everyday! look at how easy it is to end it!

*crickets chirping*

Some 18,000 children die every day because of hunger and malnutrition and 850 million people go to bed every night with empty stomachs, a "terrible indictment of the world in 2007," the head of the U.N. food agency said.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-02-17-un-hunger_x.htm

life is silly isn't it?

 

comp_atkins

is this about lives?

$4.99 worth of bathtub stickers will save more lives in one year than would be saved in 20 years of a complete ban on any all rifles.

is this about defense?

nobody uses those rifles for anything other than psychological comfort since the stats say rifles are hardly ever used in home defense with the vast majority of the times it being more convenient to just grab the handgun in your nightstand.

the bottom line is everything about this issue is bullshyt and the bullshyt is equally distributed between both sides.

This isn't going to cause a panic or anything from people who haven't heard of this "protest". Nope, I don't see how anything could possibly go wrong.

Too bad that didn't work in Germany and Norway among others. Yet in Switzerland where owning a firearm is much less restricted mass shooting never occur. The situation is also completely different between countries, races, and cultures. Comparing countries in this matter is silly.

Tezcatlipoca666

[QUOTE="DaBrainz"]I'm having a really hard time understanding the goal of this protest. JML897

That'd be my guess as well.

[QUOTE="JML897"][QUOTE="Audacitron"]

 

 

they won didn't they?  Is this a protest or a victory rally?

 

Tezcatlipoca666

Well, they are libertarians so I suspect that their objective is to disobey the government where they do not believe that it has legitimate authority. It's a symbolic protest to make the point that gun control is tyrannical. I agree with the notion but disagree with the method.

Gun control is tyrannical?  This is laughable. 

It's one of the reasons every country in the world with reasonable gun control regards the US gun debate with such dismay and derision.

And once again we have the pro-gun crowd looking as dumb as ever...

Will be hilarious if they go through with this.

Say,do these people really think that guns can protect their liberty in case the government goes batsh!t crazy?

Because I don't think a horde comprising of this

can survive a battle against a small team comprising of this:

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

just to play the devils advocate here you have to admit all this attention on rifles is pretty stupid since rifles kill around 350 people a year on average while handguns kill around 6,500.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

and if this is really about the sanctity of human life or prevetable deaths or whatever why not go after the 25,000 that die per year from slip and fall injuries?

http://www.nsc.org/safety_home/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Falls/Pages/Falls.aspx

in the end everything is about some random bullshyt emotional argument that makes no logical sense.

oh no! 20 little white kids in north america die every few years from the actions of some nutcase that is impossible to legislate out of existence.

let's get in a big thing about it!

hey look over here at the 18,000 little kids that starve to death everyday! look at how easy it is to end it!

*crickets chirping*

Some 18,000 children die every day because of hunger and malnutrition and 850 million people go to bed every night with empty stomachs, a "terrible indictment of the world in 2007," the head of the U.N. food agency said.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-02-17-un-hunger_x.htm

life is silly isn't it?

 

Ninja-Hippo

australia is a terrible example.

"The public's perception is that violence is increasing, but trends in violent crime reported to police since the early 1990s reveal a mixed story. Homicide has decreased by nine percent since 1990 and armed robbery by one-third since 2001, but recorded assaults and sexual assaults have both increased steadily in the past 10 years by over 40 percent and 20 percent respectively. The rate of aggravated assault appears to have contributed to the marked rise in recorded assault, and for both assault and sexual assault the rate of increase was greater for children aged under 15 years, with increases almost double that of the older age group. Neither population changes among young adult males nor rates of offending seem to explain the trends in recorded violent crime, and indicators of change in reporting to police provide only a partial explanation. Based on self-reported victimisation and reporting to police, it would seem increased reporting of assault is somewhat responsible for the rise in recorded assault rates against adult victims. However, victimisation survey data suggest there has been little change in rates of sexual assault, although reporting to police by women seems to have increased. Victimisation survey data also do not illuminate the most significant recorded increase in violent victimisation, against children, as they are collected less frequently and only apply to those aged at least over 15 years. The paper speculates that the rise could be due to better public understanding of child protection issues and increased reporting due to public awareness of what constitutes physical and sexual assault - especially within the family - but this requires further investigation to examine how many recorded violent crimes against children relate to current and/or past events and of the relationship to the offender.

Judy Putt 
General Manager, Research"

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/341-360/tandi359/view%20paper.html

and this is a govenment site that is spinning it as hard as they possibly can and still can't get away from the 20% and 40% statistics.

assault and rape are at all time lows all over the world except where?

Say,do these people really think that guns can protect their liberty in case the government goes batsh!t crazy?call_of_duty_10

I'd like to see them try.

and all they had to do was deal with a 40% increase in assaults and a 20% increase in sexual violence.

australia is a terrible example.

"The public's perception is that violence is increasing, but trends in violent crime reported to police since the early 1990s reveal a mixed story. Homicide has decreased by nine percent since 1990 and armed robbery by one-third since 2001, but recorded assaults and sexual assaults have both increased steadily in the past 10 years by over 40 percent and 20 percent respectively. The rate of aggravated assault appears to have contributed to the marked rise in recorded assault, and for both assault and sexual assault the rate of increase was greater for children aged under 15 years, with increases almost double that of the older age group. Neither population changes among young adult males nor rates of offending seem to explain the trends in recorded violent crime, and indicators of change in reporting to police provide only a partial explanation. Based on self-reported victimisation and reporting to police, it would seem increased reporting of assault is somewhat responsible for the rise in recorded assault rates against adult victims. However, victimisation survey data suggest there has been little change in rates of sexual assault, although reporting to police by women seems to have increased. Victimisation survey data also do not illuminate the most significant recorded increase in violent victimisation, against children, as they are collected less frequently and only apply to those aged at least over 15 years. The paper speculates that the rise could be due to better public understanding of child protection issues and increased reporting due to public awareness of what constitutes physical and sexual assault - especially within the family - but this requires further investigation to examine how many recorded violent crimes against children relate to current and/or past events and of the relationship to the offender.

Judy Putt 
General Manager, Research"

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/341-360/tandi359/view%20paper.html

and this is a govenment site that is spinning it as hard as they possibly can and still can't get away from the 20% and 40% statistics.

assault and rape are at all time lows all over the world except where?

Riverwolf007

Well, this'll end poorly.

[QUOTE="Tezcatlipoca666"]

 

Too bad that didn't work in Germany and Norway among others. Yet in Switzerland where owning a firearm is much less restricted mass shooting never occur. The situation is also completely different between countries, races, and cultures. Comparing countries in this matter is silly.

Ninja-Hippo

I made those examples to point out differences and why you SHOULDN'T make comparisons. There are many factors involved. Demographics would be a good start.

Furthermore, is there any evidence that crime has actually decreased in Australia and that this can be related to firearm legislation? Mass shootings only account for a miniscule percentage of all firearm related crimes anywhere you look. Hardly a good barometer to judge the effectiveness of so called "gun control".

I'm not a fan of civil disobedience, even if I agree with the cause. The law says loaded weapons can't be carried openly in Washington DC. This is a TERRIBLE idea.

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

and all they had to do was deal with a 40% increase in assaults and a 20% increase in sexual violence.

australia is a terrible example.

"The public's perception is that violence is increasing, but trends in violent crime reported to police since the early 1990s reveal a mixed story. Homicide has decreased by nine percent since 1990 and armed robbery by one-third since 2001, but recorded assaults and sexual assaults have both increased steadily in the past 10 years by over 40 percent and 20 percent respectively. The rate of aggravated assault appears to have contributed to the marked rise in recorded assault, and for both assault and sexual assault the rate of increase was greater for children aged under 15 years, with increases almost double that of the older age group. Neither population changes among young adult males nor rates of offending seem to explain the trends in recorded violent crime, and indicators of change in reporting to police provide only a partial explanation. Based on self-reported victimisation and reporting to police, it would seem increased reporting of assault is somewhat responsible for the rise in recorded assault rates against adult victims. However, victimisation survey data suggest there has been little change in rates of sexual assault, although reporting to police by women seems to have increased. Victimisation survey data also do not illuminate the most significant recorded increase in violent victimisation, against children, as they are collected less frequently and only apply to those aged at least over 15 years. The paper speculates that the rise could be due to better public understanding of child protection issues and increased reporting due to public awareness of what constitutes physical and sexual assault - especially within the family - but this requires further investigation to examine how many recorded violent crimes against children relate to current and/or past events and of the relationship to the offender.

Judy Putt 
General Manager, Research"

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/tandi/341-360/tandi359/view%20paper.html

and this is a govenment site that is spinning it as hard as they possibly can and still can't get away from the 20% and 40% statistics.

assault and rape are at all time lows all over the world except where?

Ninja-Hippo

lets look at america over the last couple of decades.

The number of rapes per capita in the United States has plunged by more than 85 percent since the 1970s, and reported rape fell last year even while other violent offenses increased, according to federal crime data.

This seemingly stunning reduction in sexual violence has been so consistent over the past two decades that some experts say they have started to believe it is accurate, even if they cannot fully explain why it is occurring.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/18/AR2006061800610.html

do you really think it is possible that american women have stopped reporting rapes.

what is going on in oz?

at a time when rape all around the world is going down you have a huge increase.

i'm not going to say you are not right and it is totally not casual causation but you need to include all the information here.

also i am trying to go out of my way to include legit sources and not some right wing nutbags blogs.

like this one from the washington post who is reporting here on a study showing the gun buyback had little  real effect on homicide.

Given those flaws in the studies showing no effect, the Leigh and Neill study appears the most reliable of the ones conducted. It seems reasonably clear, then, that the gun buyback led to a large decline in suicides, and weaker but real evidence that it reduced homicides as well.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/02/did-gun-control-work-in-australia/

so some slight evidence of reduced homicides with weak evidence?

i mean come on that's all we have to go off of?