Million Gun Owner March will happen Spring 2010

[old dog]

imported post

Is it really necessary to repeat, and repeat, and repeat previous postings when responding? One can refer to a writer without cluttering up the already-awkward pages.

 

[Jeff Watts]

imported post

I believe the demonstration should be peaceful, organized, and orderly.

The media will be salivating over the possibility of someone bringing a gun, or some sort of a civil disturbance. They will use that act of stupidity as a "whoopin' stick" to show why guns should be outlawed, and we will have done ourselves more harm than good.

This time needs to be a "cordial visit" to D.C.

I know that a great many people believe that all peaceful means of redress have been exhausted. I admit to feeling that way myself, from time to time.

We absolutely must make every peaceful attempt to restore our rights before we instate the final option.

You have to think for a moment how this is going to be percieved in D.C. I'm willing to bet money that we'll be faced with police in full riot gear, and armed to the teeth. All it would take is one idiot with a gun to turn the mall into Tienamen square.

 

[AWDstylez]

imported post

Jeff Watts wrote:

I believe the demonstration should be peaceful, organized, and orderly.

The media will be salivating over the possibility of someone bringing a gun, or some sort of a civil disturbance. They will use that act of stupidity as a "whoopin' stick" to show why guns should be outlawed, and we will have done ourselves more harm than good.

This time needs to be a "cordial visit" to D.C.

I know that a great many people believe that all peaceful means of redress have been exhausted. I admit to feeling that way myself, from time to time.

We absolutely must make every peaceful attempt to restore our rights before we instate the final option.

You have to think for a moment how this is going to be percieved in D.C. I'm willing to bet money that we'll be faced with police in full riot gear, and armed to the teeth. All it would take is one idiot with a gun to turn the mall into Tienamen square.

See, those were my first thoughts, until I read this:

N00blet45

I was encouraged and thought about going. Then I heard one of the radio interviews where Skip said there would be no firearms.

While I understand what he is trying to accomplish I don't subscribe to that way of thinking. What would we prove by bringing a million, two million, or even ten million people to DC just to obey an unconstitutional law? Isn't that what's been going on already?

All we're proving by showing up and not being civilly disobedient is that we're not happy but we'll continue to play nice. Imagine what the civil rights movement would have achieved if the blacks just kept drinking from their water fountains and stayed out of the white restaurants because they didn't want to break the law.

That's an excellent point and has now put me on the fence about whether guns should be allowed or not. How many blacks were arrested during the civil rights movement? How much would have been accomplished if they never actually defied unjust laws? Do you really think the government is going to pull of a shoot out with a million people in the middle of the capital? Are they really going to make a million arrests?

 

[ConditionThree]

imported post

Jeff Watts wrote:

I'm willing to bet money that we'll be faced with police in full riot gear, and armed to the teeth. All it would take is one idiot with a gun to turn the mall into Tienamen square.

That's an easy bet to make. The authorities are of the opinion that even unarmed, such a demonstration is not a 'cordial' visit- so whether participants go armed or not is irrelevant. This is such an event, that the authorities could manufacture a reason to turn the screws on participants- forcing 2A advocates to back down or look fringe.

I think this demonstration has three possible outcomes;

Tienamen Square - (As you mentioned.) Too few participants and push comes to shove. Lives and rights are lost, and the country goes on as it did before.

Gunny Palooza - 20-30K gun owners show up, have a few speechifying moments, generally have a good time andshake hands with the assistants and aides to policy makers. Nothing changes.

Lexington Green - While possible, it isnt likely. 1 Million or more gunowners, men, women and their children peacably congregate at the Capitol with rifles slung handguns holstered. The authorities make overtures to disarm and arrest them and instigate an armed confrontation being vastly outnumbered by the masses of 2A proponents who came to participate in something meaningful. While theauthorities could be neatly routed being so outnumbered, the men that had the fortitude of character to stand up to this tyranny died 200 years ago. Im not sure if any exist in this age, but since there are so few of them, they would be a bird on a wire.

While I enjoy guns and their owners, I dont need to go to Washington DC to socialize with them and talk about what might be.

 

[Jeff Watts]

imported post

If we bring guns, then we might as well plan on Lexington green/Tienamen square.

 

[BlueStreek]

imported post

I don't see much use in this if you can't even bring an empty holster. How's that going to look. A million law abiding citizens willingly disarming themselves because of unconstitutional laws. That should play out nicely for them. I can see the media blitz now.

I think this group needs to reconsider this whole event and possibly hold it next door in Arlington, VA where every legal gun owner can open carry. Maybe it wouldn't have the impact of being on Tiananmen Square... I mean the National Mall. But a million gun owners armed just miles from the capital saying "Fix it now and make it right per the Constitution or next time we're here we will be armed but on your doorstep" may have a bigger impact.

Then again from what some people have posted I probably wouldn't be very welcome as I will NOT wear a suit. I WILL go as myself (scary thought there). And I will at the very least wear an empty holster or two.

 

[Thundar]

imported post

This would be a classic stand off situation if the citizens went bearing arms. By bringing arms the marchers are obviously willing to stand up as free men. An assault on the citizens bearing arms would bring a certain clash. The question is whether the authorities would risk a violent confrontation to enforce unconstitutional laws?

It would be a win for freedom regardless of the outcome.

No violence - Gov't taught to respect the constitution.

Violence - Government taught that citizens are not subjects and WILL resist tyranny.

 

[unreconstructed1]

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

If you want something symbolic I think an empty holster is pretty stupid. Look at what you posted. None of those things are in any way directly related to what they represent. They're simple symbols that can be easily and identically reproduced for use as pins, bumper stickers, logos, etc and recognized by anyone.

I agree that empty holsters should be allowed, but if you think it ever has a chance of doing what the pink ribbon (or now just that shade of pink) has done for breast cancer awareness you're crazy. The second amendment movement needs its own simple, repeatable symbol. Sure you can have someone make a super sweet empty holster logo, but it will completely lack what made all those other symbols so popular: simplicity.

I'm not suggesting that an empty holster become a permanent symbol for our movement, but it would make a decent impromptu symbol.

as for the simple designs not being directly related to their causes, you couldn't be more wrong. each image has a definite history with the cause it represents. the clenched fist began as an impromptu symbol of the civil rights movement due to the close connection with the black panthers. it was never meant as a bumper sticker or logo, just as a way for members to show their support for the cause, similar to the empty holster.

 

[YllwFvr]

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

If you want something symbolic I think an empty holster is pretty stupid. Look at what you posted. None of those things are in any way directly related to what they represent. They're simple symbols that can be easily and identically reproduced for use as pins, bumper stickers, logos, etc and recognized by anyone.

I agree that empty holsters should be allowed, but if you think it ever has a chance of doing what the pink ribbon (or now just that shade of pink) has done for breast cancer awareness you're crazy. The second amendment movement needs its own simple, repeatable symbol. Sure you can have someone make a super sweet empty holster logo, but it will completely lack what made all those other symbols so popular: simplicity.

Ok Im risking offending delicate sensibilities here. You were stating those symbols do not directly relate to the subject they represent.

Would you prefer they use an image of a breast with a malignant growth on it? The symbol has to be socially acceptable as well. I much prefer the pink ribbon honestly.

I dont think there is anything wrong with an empty holster. Dont forget that this symbol has already been used to support gun rights.

This guy has put alot of effort into organizing this. I dont agree with his views but I WILL respect his wishes. This is his show, I will play by his rules.

On a side note... How am I ever going to be able to find a parking spot?!

 

[Don Barnett]

imported post

Sir, I agree with you about the need to communicate with your Representatives in
Congress, but at this point in time, I do not think that they are listening to anyone except their "Messiah", Barack Obama.

I have contacted my Senators and Congressman numerous times about my distain for the Federal Stimulus (sic) Bill (actually a bloated Big Govenment spending bill) and have gotten nothing more than "canned" replies saying stuff about how bad the previous administraton was and that this bill is the "way, the truth and the light".

I am frustrated...we need to get out in force!

 

[Thundar]

imported post

hellfogg wrote:

Received this message on Facebook.



*** This was posted on the Second Amendment March facebook wall. It is not specifically directed toward the recipient of this message. We just wanted to get the word out to dispel any misinformation going around about the march. ***

With all due respect to all of you, because I know you are patriots like myself. There can be no guns, no ammo, no holsters, no gun-related items in the DC march. So please stop talking like there will be. It's a bad idea and we're not doing it. Please don't be offended, but that's how it has to be. I hope all of you understand that we are all ambassadors for the Second Amendment on this venue, not soldiers in a shooting war. This is peaceful. This has to be good PR or not at all.

Skip Coryell
Founder and Organizer
Second Amendment March

Skip,

Why can there be no guns in the march? Cap & ball pistols are not prohibited by the DC laws. The reason for the 2A is to give the citizen the ability to resist tyranny. Why try to disarm citizens whose purpose in marching is to assert that the right does exist?

Live Free or Die,

Thundar