Do you approve of peacefully armed protesters?

[RCB]

As long as we don't become the tool by which we are stripped of the 2nd amendment, it's fine.

People knock me because I believe in conspiracies (because you know the government never lies). These are the exact situations that some have waited for, for a long time. It could give them all the muscle they need to put the coffin nail in. The whole of the developed world can bare down on the US, given the right circumstances.

The better part of valour is discretion.

I see nothing wrong with protests armed, I just hope that wisdom is forefront. One nut in camo with a chip on his shoulder and rocks for brains could end it all, as it is drawing so much attention.

That said, hopefully it will condition people to realize just what our freedoms are and why we have them.

 

[SavageEagle]

I appreciate your concern and your support. Maybe you would do good to help us organize?

Also realize that the moment outside government bare anything down on the USA will be the day Americans push Washington aside an bare down on them. That is why we Walk through Indy. To avoid that at all costs.

 

[RCB]

Actually, I have been wondering how these things are organized? Will you be signing people up on the spot. Someone to check weapons are being safely handled? I know you said something about IPD helping?

 

[SavageEagle]

I just answered this before you posted the above, but here it is again.

Plants are not a concern because only those who plan to attend and have contacted me with an email address will know where we are going to meet. Anyone not on that list that shows up will go through much scrutiny.

Also, everyones firearms will be checked for safety before we leave. Also note that if they decide to carry with a loaded magazine, no long arm will be allowed to have a bullet in the chamber. None. Not one. For any reason. Pistols are a different story, but are under no circumstances to be removed from their holster.

Anyone caught not obeying the rules will be asked to leave. If they refuse the police will be called in on them for disturbing the peace. If they truly have the events best interests in mind it will never come to that.

 

[6birds]

Your first post on this topic reads "If the politicians are so afraid of Gun Toting Americans, they don't need to be leading this Country."

Your last post on this topic reads "Also, everyones firearms will be checked for safety before we leave. Also note that if they decide to carry with a loaded magazine, no long arm will be allowed to have a bullet in the chamber. None. Not one. For any reason."

Please slow down cowboy, and read your first post again. You had it right that time.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

Actually, I have been wondering how these things are organized? Will you be signing people up on the spot. Someone to check weapons are being safely handled? I know you said something about IPD helping?

It's been decided that long arms are to be carried muzzle down and absolutely NO FONDLING or SHOW-N-TELL , PERIOD .

You want to check out somebody's rifle , walk behind them .

 

[Blue Tile Spook]

As long as we don't become the tool by which we are stripped of the 2nd amendment, it's fine.

A similar argument (no pun intended) could be made for the protesters exercising their 1st Amendment rights using yelling during the Town Hall meetings with their representatives.

"Don't yell during at the guy during the meeting because, even though it is legal, people in the crowd might not like it, the politicians might get mad and try to take away our 1st Amendment rights because of you. Don't become the tool by which we are stripped of our 1st Amendment."

An ever-enlarging segment of our politicians are beginning to realize exactly where groups of citizens stand on various issues because of the anger being displayed. Some people around me wish that no one would yell at the meetings, that speakers are strictly courteous and polite. But that has gotten us exactly where we are. That displayed anger has forced more politicians to reconsider their stance, something that I consider a positive coming out of an act that some say NEVER has a positive effect when trying to get something accomplished.

If legally armed citizens continue to attend the meetings (a trend), it might not be a wholly negative thing. My concern is that, if someone shouts something stupid during a meeting, they make themself look stupid. A stupid act by a firearm owner tends, IMO, to make EVERY firearm owner look bad.

If armed, non-violent protesting is done correctly, such as the black man with the AR-15 did, it might have a small positive effect and not the negative that many people seem to expect.

I am unsure of what I support on this issue. I OC most of the time but I am not sure that I have the intestinal fortitude to attend a public meeting while OC'ing. As with other firearms issues, I am hesitant to be a test case.

 

[BloodEclipse]

I think concealed carry is better at an event like this. It's true that an unarmed citizen is a victam in waiting, but a picture is worth a thousand words and with the liberal media showing the pictures and explaing them to the sheep it does more to hurt our cause than help it.

That is your perception. At work, many people are aware I'm a gunowner and a couple have talked to me about the AZ event. Those same people didn't realize that it was also legal in Indiana. Many people I talk to are not aware we can carry at all.

So explain how this hurts our cause? Because in my experience it made people curious and they seek out a source for information without just buying the media's take on it.

 

[agentl074]

Unfortunately, we do not see protective commercials on television—only the psychological mind warping TV shows of firearms being illegal. There should be pro gun commercials involving "victim or alive" messages. We do no—nor will we—see such messages; therefore, we must exercise the right of bearing arms for the protection of others and ourselves.

 

[Paco Bedejo]

If legally armed citizens continue to attend the meetings (a trend), it might not be a wholly negative thing. My concern is that, if someone shouts something stupid during a meeting, they make themself look stupid. A stupid act by a firearm owner tends, IMO, to make EVERY firearm owner look bad.

This is merely because our 2A rights have been more marginalized than our 1A rights. There are stupid speakers, parents, gun owners, property owners, politicians, and people in general. This should NOT keep their responsible counterparts from enjoying their rights & educating others on theirs.

If something bad happens...well, then we'd just need to quickly organize more events to show its an anomaly. When everyone tucks their [rights] between their legs, the media gets to have a field day.

In the unlikely event that our gun culture really can't peaceably assemble in safety, then perhaps the gun-grabbers ARE right after all. I'd like to believe that the naysayers are just submitting to their own personal fears though.

 

[USMC_0311]

You want to check out somebody's rifle , walk behind them .

Just be carefull how close you get and what your checking out. Navy guys get a little weird sometimes.

 

[BloodEclipse]

Just be carefull how close you get and what your checking out. Navy guys get a little weird sometimes.

What are you talking about?

 

[MoparMan]

Just be carefull how close you get and what your checking out. Navy guys get a little weird sometimes.

LOL, isnt the Marines part of the Navy as well.

 

[USMC_0311]

LOL, isnt the Marines part of the Navy as well.

Yea, the best part.

 

[rambone]

So where are all you guys at? You said you looked forward to protesting.

Are you gonna start coming to some events or what? Armed or unarmed, just get out there.

 

[USMC_0311]

So where are all you guys at? You said you looked forward to protesting.

I will not be protesting anything.dunno:

 

[SavageEagle]

I will not be protesting anything.dunno:

I'm protesting that you're protesting us not protesting. Protesting someone protesting but not wanting to protest is, in effect, protesting a protest is it not?

 

[USMC_0311]

I'm protesting that you're protesting us not protesting. Protesting someone protesting but not wanting to protest is, in effect, protesting a protest is it not?

I protest that statement.

 

[SavageEagle]

Soooooooo I got a question.... If there's 135 people who are willing to go OC in a rally, why do I only have 30 people confirmed (more or less) for the OC Walk?

 

[dburkhead]

Soooooooo I got a question.... If there's 135 people who are willing to go OC in a rally, why do I only have 30 people confirmed (more or less) for the OC Walk?

That there are 135 people willing to go to some event doesn't mean that there are 135 people willing to go to this even.

Remember, most of these folk do have jobs, families, and other obligations on their time and may well have concerns about this particular event.

That's just the way things are and badgering people about it is not going to help.