Things Could Get Ugly on Independence Day

Posting from my phone so there is no link.

It seems Adam Kokesh is planning a peaceful protest march on DC on July 4th.

Sounds good right???

Nope. All of those marching will be armed and exercising "open carry" of their firearms.

On top of that, no permit papers for the march will be filed.

I get it. They want to freely exercise their 1st and 2nd amendment rights.

However, nothing says peaceful protest like a fully armed militia marching towards a nation's capitol.

This could get very ugly and bloody. If it does, be prepared. It will get even uglier and bloodier afterwards.

This is stupid. There is no way this will contribute to a peaceful goal. I don't see the government firing on the protesters unless first attacked (although it wouldn't be the first time; ie Kent State), however this kind of action seems just as likely to scare reticent anti-gun regulation congressmen to change sides than gaining support for guns with the opposition. Most likely they will be turned around when they try to enter DC. Kokesh says they'll turn back peacefully, however my main fear is that some hot head in the crowd will have a different idea.

Bryant wrote:This is stupid. There is no way this will contribute to a peaceful goal. I don't see the government firing on the protesters unless first attacked (although it wouldn't be the first time; ie Kent State), however this kind of action seems just as likely to scare reticent anti-gun regulation congressmen to change sides than gaining support for guns with the opposition. Most likely they will be turned around when they try to enter DC. Kokesh says they'll turn back peacefully, however my main fear is that some hot head in the crowd will have a different idea.

What kinda odds do you give for this turning ugly???
If shots are exchanged, what to do think the effect would be???

I for one am afraid this could turn out to be a matchstick event.

Marconius wrote:

Bryant wrote:This is stupid. There is no way this will contribute to a peaceful goal. I don't see the government firing on the protesters unless first attacked (although it wouldn't be the first time; ie Kent State), however this kind of action seems just as likely to scare reticent anti-gun regulation congressmen to change sides than gaining support for guns with the opposition. Most likely they will be turned around when they try to enter DC. Kokesh says they'll turn back peacefully, however my main fear is that some hot head in the crowd will have a different idea.

What kinda odds do you give for this turning ugly???
If shots are exchanged, what to do think the effect would be???

I for one am afraid this could turn out to be a matchstick event.

I doubt it will end violently. I presume that Kokesh knows the risks and would be selective on who hes bringing. If shots do fly, it will likely embolden some far right groups (some of the militia movement and sovereign citizen folks), however I don't see them getting very wide-spread sympathy.

Bryant wrote:
I doubt it will end violently. I presume that Kokesh knows the risks and would be selective on who hes bringing. If shots do fly, it will likely embolden some far right groups (some of the militia movement and sovereign citizen folks), however I don't see them getting very wide-spread sympathy.

You'd hope so, but if he's looking for several thousand people to go, you can be sure that a few of them will be the types that are just spoiling for a fight and looking to be the ones to "start the Second American Revolution(tm)". And it only takes one guy to start the firing, even accidentally, then everyone else will join in. Is like the old story of King Arthur: his army and the army of Mordred were drawn up on the battlefield while the two kings were having a parley. Both sides didn't trust each other, and were on the lookout for treachery. The parley was going well, until one of Arthur's men was stung by a snake and drew his sword to kill it. On seeing the flash of the sword, the other army cried "treachery" and attacked, and so battle was joined that ended in the death of Arthur. So, it only takes one small accident to result in a bloodbath.

(see, am getting all literary on ye now, more than just a pretty face, me...)

And if there was a bloodbath, you'd have the country split even more than before, the Tea Party would see it as the second Boston Massacre, no matter who fired the first shot, all of the militia survivalist types would head off for their bunkers, the rabid lefties would start screaming for the immediate confiscation of every privately-owned firearm in the country, and things would go rapidly downhill from there. God knows where it'd end up then, but you could be guaranteed it wouldn't end well for anyone.

Either way, you're probably going to hear Alex Jones and his ilk screaming "false flag! false flag!" before the march even happens like he did with the Boston bombing even before the last bodies had hit the ground.

So Miles, you see violence erupting from only one side of this???

Kinda like Bryant thinking this will make fence sitters join the anti-gun crowd.

I think both of you need more journalistic exposure.

I know many progrssives keep spouting off about the 90% who wanted gun control. That was far from true. The truth is more like 80-something% felt our current gun laws are fine. This was seen in the straight forward, no nonsense poll conducted by PBS.

Do either of you know just how many Dems are against gun control and how many will be sympathetic to the marchers??? The number is very large. It contains pretty much every Dem who lives outside the urban areas.

This could turn violent from many different sources. Historical precedent says the first shot will most likely come from those in government and not from "a kook in the crowd". One must remember that conservative protests are generally peaceful while it is the progeessives that quickly resort to violence.......at least in this country.

Anyway, if shots are exchanged, expect martial law, mass uprisings and believe it or not, war. I've said it before and I'll say it again. This nation is divided more now than it ever has been.

As long as I have to defend myself from progressives, it will remain. As long as progressives continually refer to people like me as "redneck", "sister lover", "hick", or just plain evil.....ain't nothing gonna be solved. Of course this President and his circle promote this and you guys eat it up. Why else would one take such great pains to find and post crap promoting the idiocy of "the right" at every turn??? Then once confronted with the idiocy of progresseives they casually dismiss them.

Gotta ask yourself "am I part of the problem or part of the solution"

As long as you actively try to demean us, you are a big part of the problem.

Think I'm lying??? Take a few minutes and see that pretty much every progressive in this country is wishing death on the participants of this march. Just go to the facebook page.

Bryant wrote:

Marconius wrote:

Bryant wrote:This is stupid. There is no way this will contribute to a peaceful goal. I don't see the government firing on the protesters unless first attacked (although it wouldn't be the first time; ie Kent State), however this kind of action seems just as likely to scare reticent anti-gun regulation congressmen to change sides than gaining support for guns with the opposition. Most likely they will be turned around when they try to enter DC. Kokesh says they'll turn back peacefully, however my main fear is that some hot head in the crowd will have a different idea.

What kinda odds do you give for this turning ugly???
If shots are exchanged, what to do think the effect would be???

I for one am afraid this could turn out to be a matchstick event.

I doubt it will end violently. I presume that Kokesh knows the risks and would be selective on who hes bringing. If shots do fly, it will likely embolden some far right groups (some of the militia movement and sovereign citizen folks), however I don't see them getting very wide-spread sympathy.

Kokesh is actually more in line with the left. He has spent the last 10 years supporting leftist groups in anti-war protests.He has no backing from any pro-gun organization. Just a bunch of misguided individuals.

A friend of mine had a good idea. If you want a patriotic protest march of this kind, do it with flintlocks. Course a few thousand flintlocks could be hard to find........better make those replicas.

I dont see a second civil war erupting out of this. If an altercation were to erupt, it would only send more fence sitters to the anti-gun side, once the media and dems were done putting the spin on it. Wouldnt matter who this guy was or what side of the political spectrum her aligned with. Omg i can hear them jumping up to their podiums now.

Pun wrote:I dont see a second civil war erupting out of this. If an altercation were to erupt, it would only send more fence sitters to the anti-gun side, once the media and dems were done putting the spin on it. Wouldnt matter who this guy was or what side of the political spectrum her aligned with. Omg i can hear them jumping up to their podiums now.

Enough militia groups will take this as a flashpoint to cause havoc. When that happens, watch for immediate calls for confiscation. That will cause others, even Dems, to join the side of the militias. That will lead to the declaration of martial law in many places.......even more will then join the militias. If it comes to open battles or the government treats it like insurgencies overseas, the resulting collateral damage will push many more into action. Services that many now feel entitled to or rely on will cease to exist. That is when it will get really ugly.

I will hit the sticks until it is over.

'Course I ain't no psychic.

Think you highly overestimate this personally, not that i couldnt see such a series of events from unfolding, but not over this.

Marconius wrote:

Pun wrote:I dont see a second civil war erupting out of this. If an altercation were to erupt, it would only send more fence sitters to the anti-gun side, once the media and dems were done putting the spin on it. Wouldnt matter who this guy was or what side of the political spectrum her aligned with. Omg i can hear them jumping up to their podiums now.

Enough militia groups will take this as a flashpoint to cause havoc. When that happens, watch for immediate calls for confiscation. That will cause others, even Dems, to join the side of the militias. That will lead to the declaration of martial law in many places.......even more will then join the militias. If it comes to open battles or the government treats it like insurgencies overseas, the resulting collateral damage will push many more into action. Services that many now feel entitled to or rely on will cease to exist. That is when it will get really ugly.

I will hit the sticks until it is over.

'Course I ain't no psychic.

People might condemn the government, however the militia groups carry a stigma in most of society (lots of white supremacist and christian extremist militia groups) and would likely get no sympathy from gun owning Democrats (there are way more of these than many probably realize). I don't see Militia groups finding help from anywhere save the extremes of the political spectrum.

Bryant wrote:

Marconius wrote:

Pun wrote:I dont see a second civil war erupting out of this. If an altercation were to erupt, it would only send more fence sitters to the anti-gun side, once the media and dems were done putting the spin on it. Wouldnt matter who this guy was or what side of the political spectrum her aligned with. Omg i can hear them jumping up to their podiums now.

Enough militia groups will take this as a flashpoint to cause havoc. When that happens, watch for immediate calls for confiscation. That will cause others, even Dems, to join the side of the militias. That will lead to the declaration of martial law in many places.......even more will then join the militias. If it comes to open battles or the government treats it like insurgencies overseas, the resulting collateral damage will push many more into action. Services that many now feel entitled to or rely on will cease to exist. That is when it will get really ugly.

I will hit the sticks until it is over.

'Course I ain't no psychic.

People might condemn the government, however the militia groups carry a stigma in most of society (lots of white supremacist and christian extremist militia groups) and would likely get no sympathy from gun owning Democrats (there are way more of these than many probably realize). I don't see Militia groups finding help from anywhere save the extremes of the political spectrum.

I agree. Militias will not find much support..........until confiscation. That has been and will continue to be a tipping point.

I myself know quite a few Dems that do not agree with the current attempts at gun legislation. I would say Dems make up about 40% of the gun owners in tUSA. Several of the members in my hunting lease are Dems. They are just as passionate about this topic as I am. That is why I am careful about using the term progressive. Progressives are found on both the right and the left. My distaste for them is equal regardless of "side". Right wing progressives, like Reagan, did call for things like confiscation. Left wing progressives, like Big O, wants it as well. The current legislation wasn't an immediate gun grab, but I would not be able to pass my rifles down to my son. Therefore it was confiscation........just back dated.