Oathkeepers Pull Out of Restore The Constitution Rally

imported post

Since Vandebough was invited to speak, Mike and I have repeatedly stated that any gun owner who actually cares about gun rights will RUN not walk away from this rally!

It now looks like others have started to share our opinion.

The Oathkeepers have withdrawn from the event citing the fact that it has become an anti-government rally and not a pro-gun rally.

I am calling on all OCDO members to attend the PRO-GUN rally taking place across the Potomac in DC and avoid conflating pro-gun advocates with anti-government protesters in the eyes of the media!

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/04/13/oath-keepers-withdraws-from-virginia-open-carry-rally/

imported post

Hey, has someone made up score cards for the Anti's yet? They are having to keep track of Open Carry, Oath Keepers, Pro-2A, Tea Party, etc.

Honestly, how can we expect them to know who they are talking about if they can't tell the difference between a Timothy McVeigh and other Gulf War Veterans who didn't come home and become white supremecists or survivalists or whatever T.McV was?

imported post

jpierce wrote:

Since Vandebough was invited to speak, Mike and I have repeatedly stated that any gun owner who actually cares about gun rights will RUN not walk away from this rally!

It now looks like others have started to share our opinion.

The Oathkeepers have withdrawn from the event citing the fact that it has become an anti-government rally and not a pro-gun rally.

I am calling on all OCDO members to attend the PRO-GUN rally taking place across the Potomac in DC and avoid conflating pro-gun advocates with anti-government protesters in the eyes of the media!

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2010/04/13/oath-keepers-withdraws-from-virginia-open-carry-rally/

Click to expand...

I really think that the characterization of a rally that espouses limited, constitutional government as an anti-government rally is hyperbolic at best. Many in this country are sickened by the bloated and putrid federal government behemoth.

The fed needs ato understand the parent child relationship that it has with states and with citizens. Freedom rules when we all understand that the States are the parents and the federal government is the child. When those in Washington think that they are the parent that dictates to states as if they are the children, then tyranny grows. The rally is about telling Washington that their role is limited by the constitution and the citizens that will support the constitution.

The Virginia rally is a shining beacon of American freedoms. A rally where freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and RKBA are all on display.

If we are a community that advocates nationwide open carry rights, then why is there a call to skip the freedom rally where we can freely open carry, and instead attend the federally controlled and limited rally where exercising ouropen carry rights will lead to arrest, seizure and felony charges?

Go to the rally or not, based on your political beliefs, but do not skip it because the media bogey manwillconflate gun lovers with freedom lovers and those that espouse constitutional government.

Live Free or Die,

Thundar

imported post

I think the problem with the rally is not that it "espouses limited, constitutional government." Mike Vanderboegh has made inflammatory remarks that John is rightly questioning whether we 2A advocates want associated with us. The Oathkeepers seem to feel similarly. I do too.

imported post

eye95 wrote:

I think the problem with the rally is not that it "espouses limited, constitutional government." Mike Vanderboegh has made inflammatory remarks that John is rightly questioning whether we 2A advocates want associated with us. The Oathkeepers seem to feel similarly. I do too.

Click to expand...

What remarks? When I see something pro Constitution I want to be part of it. But if it is tinfoil hat whackos, espousing conspiracy theories than I will run away. (Not that I am going anyway) Would be nice to get some clarity other than don't go.

And Thundar is right, the gov. and the media are painting anybody who wants to reduce and limit the government to it's origianal intended purposes as "anti-gov", I don't feel they equate to the same thing.

imported post

He has advocated brick-throwing. Other remarks drip with threats of armed uprising.

I don't think that's who we are.

imported post

Thundar,

And I think that a rally whose keynote speaker is espousing criminal acts against elected representatives offices can ONLY be described as anti-government!!!

I am not discouraging political debate and disagreement. Such are the foundations of a free society. But open talk of criminal behavior crosses the line! And coming together armed to support and honor someone who makes such calls is ... well ... insane if you truly care about gun rights!

No one can say that Oathkeepers is a timid organization. Their decision to bail on this rally should send a clear signal that the train is off the tracks. If Vandeboegh was not speaking (and bringing his like-minded supporters), we would not be having this discussion.

We have all worked hard to convince John and Jane citizen not to be afraid of those who choose to carry because we are law-abiding, responsible and sane ... in other words, we are just like them. And that is true. But then along comes a small group of people whose sole goal appears to be to get in the government's face and they just happen to be carrying while doing so. The purpose of the rally is not to promote gun rights and IT WILL F&&&ING HURT US!

I am not obliged to support something that is detrimental to the cause just because someone slaps the label 'Open Carry' on it! If there were an 'Open Carry stab yourself in the leg' rally would you go to it? Because that is effectively what I think this has become!

Think long and hard before adding your voice to a message that WILL come back to bite us!


John


Thundar wrote:

I really think that the characterization of a rally that espouses limited, constitutional government as an anti-government rally is hyperbolic at best.  Many in this country are sickened by the bloated and putrid federal government behemoth. 

The fed needs a to understand the parent child relationship that it has with states and with citizens.  Freedom rules when we all understand that the States are the parents and the federal  government is the child.  When those in Washington think that they are the parent that dictates to states as if they are the children, then tyranny grows.  The rally is about telling Washington that their role is limited by the constitution and the citizens that will support the constitution.

The Virginia rally is a shining beacon of American freedoms.  A rally where freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and RKBA are all on display.

If we are a community that advocates nationwide open carry rights, then why is there a call to skip the freedom rally where we can freely open carry, and instead attend the federally controlled and limited rally where exercising our open carry rights will lead to arrest, seizure and felony charges?

Go to the rally or not, based on your political beliefs, but do not skip it because the media bogey man will conflate gun lovers with freedom lovers and those that espouse constitutional government.

Live Free or Die,

Thundar

 

 

Click to expand...

imported post

After reading the Oath Keepers press release, Oath Keepers has withdrawn because of the confrontational approach, which is contrary to Oath Keepers method of working with those in government (i.e; Military and constitutional government positions take an oath - hence the name oath keepers).

Oathkeepers, unlike OCDO, has not advocated not going, only that persons that go not wear Oath Keepers gear and garments.

I do not espouse any sort of lawlessness, but I will also not paint with a broad brush the entire Restore the Constitution Open Carry Rally because of some potentialcomments from one speaker.

I may attend the Restore the Constitution Rally, but rest assured I will not wear an OCDO shirt or ballcap!

Live Free or Die,

Thundar

imported post

“In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, Brave, Hated, and Scorned. When his cause succeeds however,the timid join him, For then it costs nothing to be a Patriot.” Mark Twain

imported post

Thundar,

My concern is not the fact that there might be attendees who make comments I disagree with. Rather it is the fact that an endorsed and invited speaker, who speaks with the full permission and knowledge of the rally organizers, has made those comments and supposedly will make more during his speech (which will be covered by the press extensively as being a rally of OPEN CARRIERS).

Imagine the press image of openly armed citizens applauding a speaker putting out the kind of rhetoric that we have heard from Vanderboegh. I imagine the anti-open carry legislation drafting would start the very next day in those states where constitutionally permissible.

Thinking of how serious the negative implications might be, are we sure this event isn't being hosted by the Brady Campaign?

Thundar wrote:

After reading the Oath Keepers press release, Oath Keepers has withdrawn because of the confrontational approach, which is contrary to Oath Keepers method of working with those in government (i.e; Military and constitutional government positions take an oath - hence the name oath keepers). 

Oathkeepers, unlike OCDO, has not advocated not going, only that persons that go not wear Oath Keepers gear and garments.

I do not espouse any sort of lawlessness, but I will also not paint with a broad brush the entire Restore the Constitution Open Carry Rally because of some potential comments from one speaker. 

I may attend the Restore the Constitution Rally, but rest assured I will not wear an OCDO shirt or ballcap!

Live Free or Die,

Thundar

 

Click to expand...

imported post

Great quote. But revolutionary rhetoric does not move our cause forward since we do not espouse revolution. If you do seek revolution or secession or sex with aliens, then there are other forums for you.

Here, we seek to improve the legal environment for gun rights through the legislatures, the judiciary and the courts of public opinion. All three of these efforts will be made more difficult (especially public opinion) by this rally.


Thos.Jefferson wrote:

“In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, Brave, Hated, and Scorned. When his cause succeeds however,the timid join him, For then it costs nothing to be a Patriot.”   Mark Twain

Click to expand...

imported post

"When peaceful revolution is made impossible, violent revolution is inevitable" John Fitzgerald Kennedy

"Sex with aliens" ??? Come on now that's a bit much don't you think? Statements like that violate your own rules Mr. Pierce


I personally seek a government that remains within the confines of the Constitution. The great statesman Thomas Jefferson is credited as saying" The only rights you have are those you are willing to fight and die for"

imported post

I don't believe that peaceful change has become impossible. At the moment, believing it has is something of an extreme view. Clearly, the owners of this site do not share that view and believe that association with that view damages the cause they are advocating here.

I think their position is eminently reasonable.

imported post

I though the 'sex with aliens' comment was a bit of humor to soften the sting of the rest of the comment. If you took it as an insult, then I did violate my own rules and I apologize. I will say however that the green Orion women from the original Star Trek were cute!

But on a more serious note, your Kennedy quote in response only reinforces what I was saying. If you really believe that our country is so broken that there is no solution other than violent revolution then please leave this forum and find like minded individuals elsewhere.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Regardless of the disagreements I might have as a libertarian with the current state of politics, the economy, etc, I also clearly recognize that America still remains the most freedom loving, rights-enhanced country in the world!!!! Revolutionary rhetoric only allows your opinion to be marginalized and ignored.

Anyone who would tear down a magnificent building because the light bulbs need changing is delusional in my opinion.

Thos.Jefferson wrote:

"When peaceful revolution is made impossible, violent revolution is inevitable" John Fitzgerald Kennedy

"Sex with aliens" ??? Come on now that's a bit much don't you think? Statements like that violate your own rules Mr. Pierce

Click to expand...

imported post

I do not advocate the tearing down of a beautiful building any more than than I see the reason in burning down your own house when you are angry at the establishment (civil right movement riots).

I see this country as beingat the same point in history that it was in 1775. At that time the citizens had been petitioning the King since about 1763 to no avail.

In We the People v. U.S. the Court ruled that yes We may petition for redress of grievance but they do not have to listen.

I'm sorry folks but the deck has been stacked against Us.:banghead:

Now once again I will re-iterate. I do not advocate the overthrow of the current gov't but the Unanimous Declaration is codified law and the People retain the right to alter or abolish the government if it (gov't) fails to protect Our Liberties as it was intended.

imported post

I agree with John 100%

Many folks here who are very active in the struggle and fight for less restrictive gun laws and greater firearms freedom are also very active in the TEA party movement and other conservative causes.

I am as well. I've attended TEA parties, I've made some anti-tax (not anti-government) signs and paraded around with the rest of my right leaning friends.

I do not OC during these events. This is a SEPERATE cause.

Firearms freedom is for EVERYONE. Even (gasp) LIBERALS!

When you are an activist for a certain cause the absolute WORST thing you can do is TIE IT LIKE AN ANCHOR to another cause.

Those who feel like making OC a part of the TEA party movement, tax demonstrations, or anti-government protests make it synonymous with those things. This TAKES IT AWAY from those who do NOT identify with the TEA partiers and conservatives.

Is there anyone here who believes liberals SHOULDN'T support firearms freedom?

Tie it to the TEA party. This will definately prevent them from supporting it. After all, if you choose to tie Open Carry to being a right wing conservative, what incentive does this provide a liberal to OC if they'll instantly be recognized as one of those TEA partiers because they openly carry?

I thought OC was for everyone. Why would you want to limit it to only those who agree with you on something totally unrelated?

imported post

Wow. While I agree that we shouldn't tie OC to other causes, I hadn't considered the reasoning you just presented.

Well said.

The only problem is that you are making me think...and that hurts.

imported post

If the long term goal of OCDO is the normalization of firearms, then why would we red line certain political events?

Seems counter productive to me.

imported post

Thundar wrote:

If the long term goal of OCDO is the normalization of firearms, then why would we red line certain political events?

Seems counter productive to me.

Click to expand...

If we are not willing to avoid some rallies due to the nature of the message that those rallies put forward, then the natural extension of that idea is that we participate, representing the OCDO community, at KKK rallies, Communist Party rallies, Nazi party rallies, etc.

Clearly that line has to be drawn. The only question is where to draw it. John has, IMO, reasonably put a rally at which there will be a speaker who has advocated brick-throwing on the other side of the line.

He is then asking us not to represent the cause of his site at that rally. I believe that we should accede to that reasonable request.

imported post

I advocate a revolution by non-violent political processes, and one of those processes is the battle to inform the population and thereby shape public opinion. So we have to communicate using media. The problem is that the opposition controls the media. They plant agents provocateur in peaceful assemblies and rallies, and then aim their cameras at them to subvert the message and marginalize us.

This greatly diminishes the impact of the lawful use of political processes and drives some to advocate violence; these events are then falsely attributed to us regardless of whether we stand with them or not.

The upshot: if you advocate violence you're a kook, and if you don't you're painted as a kook anyway.

The deck definitely is stacked against us, but I'm going to stand on my principles anyway.