July 4 armed march in DC...???

[Alabama Shooter]

Some of the folks opposed are planning to throw firecrackers at the protesters to see how they'll react. Even if that doesn't happen, wait until the cops get rough with just one of these guys. The whole situation is a powderkeg filled with radioactive rattlesnakes.

Somebody needs to stop these crazies before the media starts painting with an even broader brush. At the very least a strong statement of condemnation from various gun rights organizations would be a good idea.

[Tom Servo]

Did you watch those debates and hear that question?

I did, and at the time they amounted to hot air. There was little support in the legislature for any sort of gun policy.

Sandy Hook was a catalyst, one that could be exploited and gave momentum to the gun-control lobby they hadn't had in twenty years. Without it, I doubt we'd have had a credible push at all.

We're at the crossroads of a great precipice here. That legislation is still out there, and there's no depth to which our enemies won't sink to belittle and misrepresent us. A bunch of armed nutjobs clashing with police or counter-demonstrators while committing a felony would be a gold mine for those people.

[Wreck-n-Crew]

Marching in Washington I believe is a worthless cause as well.

When ordinary Americans lose the fight to have Christmas be called Christmas, in certain places across the country so that no one is offended you know the support is gone on a serious level.

Doing something like this will only quicken the day that many are dreaming of, the banning of private ownership.

People often follow and do as they see others do and without full thought to the repercussions.

I may sound passive but I see that people have changed and find myself among the minority more often then i ever thought i would. I see no need to fall on my sword with the exception of only one that is worth that kind of sacrifice.
You have to choose your battles so to speak and this one is not worth it.

[Sweet Shooter]

Tom Servo
Heaven help me, I read through the posts on their Facebook page. It's more incoherent vitriol (from both sides) than the human mind should be expected to ingest.

I know right? And these folk get to vote on your future!!!!! Something should be done.
-SS-

[Merad]

Anyone who joins this fool's crusade is going to end up as a convicted felon and lose all their rights.

You do have to appreciate the irony of it. I suppose it's sort of a gun owner's version of natural selection.

[Tom Servo]

Let's keep things temperate, folks.

[Gary L. Griffiths]

Some of the folks opposed are planning to throw firecrackers at the protesters to see how they'll react. Even if that doesn't happen, wait until the cops get rough with just one of these guys. The whole situation is a powderkeg filled with radioactive rattlesnakes.

I couldn't agree more. What I'm really afraid of is that the organizers will attract a nut fringe (nut fringe of the nut fringe, if you will) who will try to resist the inevitable arrests that will occur. Slain policemen and slain protesters. Result: Gun Owners = Terrorists.

Where's the banghead smilie when you really need it?

[teeroux]

This is a horrifically bad idea, with the potential to create real problems for the RKBA as a whole. What they're doing is patently illegal in the District. Right or wrong, like it or not, it is illegal.

There was a time when it was illegal for a certain group of people to ride at the front of the bus also. Folks still chose to break the unjust laws because they needed breaking.

[ryan3465]

This is such a terrible idea. This is a perfect example of how the actions of a few can potentially have serious consequence for all of us law-abiding gun owners as a whole. The mainstream media will latch on to this story and drain it dry, to the detriment of the pro-2A movement.

Have any gun rights organizations come out and publicly condemned these people? And if not, we all need to be writing these organizations and telling them to. These irresponsible people do nothing to further our cause by violating the laws (however wrong they may be) and undoubtedly causing serious, potentially deadly armed confrontation between groups of people and law enforcement. There is just no good that can come from this.

[Alabama Shooter]

There was a time when it was illegal for a certain group of people to ride at the front of the bus also. Folks still chose to break the unjust laws because they needed breaking.

They choose to boycott the buses not make an armed march on Montgomery just to see what would happen. It wasn't a felony either.

[Salvarus]

A armed march on DC is a horrible idea. Like other posts have mentioned here this all the makings of PR catastophe of epic proportions. Why would you give our opponents something that would potentially undo any progress we have made?

We are winning most of these battles in state legislatures. Im writing the NRA and GOA to intervene.

[Mike Irwin]

"I have to believe that the DC government cannot afford politically for this proposed armed march to happen."

Politically, it's gun owners who can't afford for this moronic fiasco of an idea to take place.

[eldermike]

Low information content is more dangerous than I thought. We just had a first pass at federal gun control and it failed, as it should based upon our system as set up by our founders. It failed because Washington worked in our favor because we the people picked our man/woman to speak for us. It worked, we do not have an AWB, or a limit on mags or anything for that matter.

So, our reaction to this success is to do something like this idea? Let's go show them how much we don't pay attention?

You don't need to carry a gun to DC, just carry some common sense into the voting booth.

[bumnote]

This is a horrifically bad idea, with the potential to create real problems for the RKBA as a whole.

Amen!
I wonder at time just which side someone like this is really on. I'd have a hard time coming up with a better PR event or better image for the anti-gun to play to and use as an example as something as truly stupid as this.

Odds are it's not going to happen. Don't know who this guy is or even care to find out...but I'd bet money on him cancelling it for whatever reason before too long.

[Tom Servo]

You don't need to carry a gun to DC, just carry some common sense into the voting booth.

That's my biggest frustration with the gun culture. The guy screaming about how he's had it with "the way things are" and wants to "take his country back" doesn't actually...um...really...vote. He doesn't contact his elected officials. Most of the time, he doesn't know who they even are. He just shows up on the weekends to yell at the choir.

I'd love to do an honest poll of the political involvement for these guys. I'd wager it's pretty close to zero.

All of which makes public displays like this more repellent to me.

[eldermike]

Principles are not directed by circumstances; they are just principles and should stand any test of circumstances. What principles do your local elected officials hold? Start there, if they do not match your principles then vote them out. If they are catering to your circumstances instead of representing your principles then “you” are the problem.

One might say: “that’s how I do it now”. But I will bet you that your circumstances are what’s driving your voting decisions.
Get that changed back around to living by principles no matter the circumstances while expecting the same from those you elect, and the USA will survive with its 2’nd amendment in tact.

And the fools that want to take back the country given a look in the mirror might well see the ones they are picking a fight with, looking right back at them. They are the ones that built the machine that’s eating freedom and pooping solutions.

[Alabama Shooter]

You don't need to carry a gun to DC, just carry some common sense into the voting booth.

That won't work in DC. If they will reelect an ex-con crack head as mayor and then to city council then clearly we are not dealing with a normal electorate here.

[eldermike]

You don't have to live in DC, in fact my principles will not allow it and my circumstances will not make me.

[bumnote]

You don't need to carry a gun to DC, just carry some common sense into the voting booth.

That won't work in DC. If they will reelect an ex-con crack head as mayor and then to city council then clearly we are not dealing with a normal electorate here.

Believe this is about national voting, not local DC voting.

From the OP's link: The group plans to meet at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia. From there, they will march across the Memorial Bridge into Washington, D.C. and continue down Independence Avenue.

They might not even make into DC. They'll have to meet outside it. If the appear inside Arlington Nat. Cemetary with a firearm, they've already broken the law on Federal property. The US Park Police has jurisdiction there and they're not park rangers and their chief stated today if they carry there they're breaking the law and will be arrested. The Pentagon Police are a mile up the road, I'm friends with some of them and they'll not to be tangled with either. Arlington PD, Army MP's and as they march across the bridge they'll run into DC Metro PD, and they have a lot of crowd control experience. That chief said today she's fine with them protesting, but if break the law by carrying they'll be arrested. Using Memorial Bridge to cross into DC puts you right at the Lincoln Memorial, so I do know if DC PD would handle that or the US Park PD.
This would run out of steam quickly once they actually see what law enforcement agencies are like here. They're all trained to deal with far larger crowds that this would attract. They have the resources and manpower to stop it quickly and quietly if they break the law. If they're coming to this area intending to break the law, they probably won't get permits...and with traffic here being what it is, you don't want to try to march on the roadways and bridges without that being blocked off.

[JerryM]

At first glance it seems like a bad idea.
However, non-violent confrontations have had some good results, such as the civil rights movement. Does anyone think we would be where we are today in that area without non-violent protests?

I admit there is a problem with carrying a firearm, and especially with ammo. It would have to be done with extreme care, and be ready to be arrested, and maybe convicted of a felony.
Are the marchers prepared to accept those consequences? I would not be prepared to accept them.

Jerry

[SPEMack618]

Originally Posted by dakota.potts

The Bonus Army actually appropriated some money for the benefits promised to them and laid the foundation for the G.I Bill of Rights. Somehow I see this as not on the same level.

Oh, no. I agree wholeheartedly.

As a veteran, I am sickened at what Patton, Ike, and Mac let happen as they dispered said march.

Some nutjobs on other sites are comparing this nonsense, though, to the Bonus Army and seem to be spoiling for a showdown with the 3rd Inf RGT. Which I think might be the most insepid thing I've read.

[leprechaun50]

Feel free to flame away. I think that the NRA, GOA, SAF and the rest of the gun rights groups need to get in front of this with strong statements that these nut jobs do not represent the majority of gun owners.

[KyJim]

I think that the NRA, GOA, SAF and the rest of the gun rights groups need to get in front of this with strong statements that these nut jobs do not represent the majority of gun owners.

The potential downside is that statements by the NRA, etc. will simply bring attention to the matter.

[leprechaun50]

They will get dragged into this anyway. Might as well draw first blood.

[johnwilliamson062]

A big risk at the very least.
Minority groups have won concessions in the US from the beginning with armed movements though.
Although the marches through the south were not "armed" marches, there were armed people involved. Deacons for Defense and Justice being the best known.
On the other end you see the Black Panthers in California taking action that almost certainly led to the passage of several very strict firearms restrictions.
There are armed marches on state capitols fairly regularly and they pass without incident. I have been to several in my state capitol. Ohio's CHL law was passed as a direct effect of continuous openly armed citizen presence on Capitol Square in Columbus.
I think it will mostly depend on the size of the protest. If it is a crowd the DC police think they can easily overwhelm, they will certainly react. If federal agencies need to be involved it will be a challenge for them politically. Bringing in 20,000 armed military personnel to handle 10,000 armed protestors won't go over well. Remember, there were no TV news cameras, let alone smart phones in every persons pocket in 1932. Over running the bonus army was covered in mostly rumor.

One problem many "conservative" groups have is members are much more concerned about even the smallest of legal problems showing on their record. Many "progressive" groups have enough members who could care less about such things that they can stage protests where everyone gets arrested with regularity.