March on Washington 07-04-2013

[joanie]

Actually I was making the case that SECOND HAND smoke is not hazardous.

Yes, I know, and I was pointing out how very wrong you are. You didn't watch the video I posted, did you? If people want to lock themselves in an airtight room and pack it full of tobacco smoke, making sure it never escapes and harms others, I say more power to them, and also, been nice knowing you, bye now, you won't be around for long.

Smokers take it through the filter, those forced to second hand smoke against their will, take what comes of the end of the ciggerette.

Heather Crow, a waitress in Ottowa Canada for 30 years never smoked in her life. Yet, she has lung cancer. It was her job, she worked around smokers, it was a smoking resturaunt, "we're dying to serve you" Watch the video, it it don't open your eyes to this, nothing will.

 

[moriar]

BTW - presuming Kokesh does not pierce the boundaries of Arlington National Cemetary, his march will be legal on the Virginia half of the Memorial Bridge; Chief Lanier has said she intends to meet the marchers at the boundary of DC. If Kokesh is serious about stopping and turning around as soon as they meet armed resistance, it will be a very short march.
Virginia claims out to mid Potomac. Something about how Arlington was given back to Virginia.

Question, is there a VA side of the bridge? The bridge that goes from Arlington into Georgetown immediately touching the bridge says "Welcome to DC"... is this the same on memorial?

 

[Gil223]

Actually I was making the case that SECOND HAND smoke is not hazardous.

Nice segue! s/ I'd like to take this opportunity to discuss black lung disease, but this is an OC forum... WTH does your diatribe against smoking (or most of the 385 other postings) have to do with OC? Somebody needs to lock this thread - it probably should have been in the social lounge to begin with... or a political forum somewhere else.

 

[Fuller Malarkey]

Question, is there a VA side of the bridge? The bridge that goes from Arlington into Georgetown immediately touching the bridge says "Welcome to DC"... is this the same on memorial?

I'll be interested in the answer...

A few years back, I witnessed a motorcyclist struck by a car on Arlington Memorial Bridge. My 911 call for the down motorcyclist went to Arlington Police Department [I'm guessing, as that's who showed up]. Arlington cops told me they were just there for traffic control. As the meat wagon folks were loading the rider up, U.S. Park Police showed up. They told me the bridge was their jurisdiction. Subpoenaed as a witness, I got to go to Alexandria Federal Courthouse four times over the next year for that good deed.

 

[eye95]

Fair enough, but it's not an illegal mob marching on the seat of government. It is an open carry demonstration.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The real law violation is the lack of respect that the government in DC has for the constitution, IMO.

It is clearly against the laws on the books. If those laws are unconstitutional, then use constitutional means to get them removed.

BTW, you butchered my sentence beyond recognition, obliterating what I was saying. So I will simply rewrite that sentence here:

If you can't (or won't) see the difference between the British marching on us, and Kokesh's illegal mob marching on the seat of government, then I don't really care.

That sentence was pointing out the significant difference between the British aggressions that precipitated the "Shot Heard 'round the World" and Kokesh trying to force another shot by being the aggressor!

 

[joanie]

I stumbled across this on Youtube.

Hitler finds out about Open Carry- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9B7YguqJApU

ehh, kinda funny.

more news on Adam- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3P0URgjHlk

 

[Tucker6900]

It is clearly against the laws on the books. If those laws are unconstitutional, then use constitutional means to get them removed.

BTW, you butchered my sentence beyond recognition, obliterating what I was saying. So I will simply rewrite that sentence here:

If you can't (or won't) see the difference between the British marching on us, and Kokesh's illegal mob marching on the seat of government, then I don't really care.

That sentence was pointing out the significant difference between the British aggressions that precipitated the "Shot Heard 'round the World" and Kokesh trying to force another shot by being the aggressor!

See, now Im confused. You have been talking about how this is illegal, but then you turn around and tell people to use the Constitution. What Constitution are you reading? Because the one Im reading specifically states that the people have the right to abolish the government if their government is causing harm to the people. You must be reading the Obama shortened version.

There is nothing more Constitutional than enforcing the laws stated within. You go ahead and stand with the .gov. Lets see how far that gets you.

 

[WalkingWolf]

See, now Im confused. You have been talking about how this is illegal, but then you turn around and tell people to use the Constitution. What Constitution are you reading? Because the one Im reading specifically states that the people have the right to abolish the government if their government is causing harm to the people. You must be reading the Obama shortened version.

There is nothing more Constitutional than enforcing the laws stated within. You go ahead and stand with the .gov. Lets see how far that gets you.

Take note that if he is going to stand with the government, unless he is a government agent, he would have to violate those very same laws he is claiming should be obeyed.

 

[KBCraig]

As an update, Kokesh is not "missing". He's at the Federal Detention Center, Phildelphia.

 

[joanie]

As an update, Kokesh is not "missing". He's at the Federal Detention Center, Phildelphia.

Big question on my mind is why. When anyone calls the place to question, they give a diffrent answer. Once that he resisted arrest, another time it was falure to ID. Both would fall under the regular or local police. He should be in their jail with due proceess. But instead he is in a federal detention center under NDAA where he has no rights at all. They could even be lying about that.

This alone prooves that this march was the right thing to do, and must go on with or without him. If they can get away with killing Adam, or detaining him indeffently on pre crime, You could be next, or I could be next, simply for being a member of an open carry discussion board.

 

[Tucker6900]

Take note that if he is going to stand with the government, unless he is a government agent, he would have to violate those very same laws he is claiming should be obeyed.

Good point. +1

 

[JmE]

I know eye95 personally and we have demonstrated side by side for open carry rights. Although I vehemently disagree with him on this point, I can think of few others that I'd trust to have my back in a pinch. I won't pretend to speak for him but if I were to guess, I'd say that Kokesh and this march have his jimmies rustled. Any strong thoughts he might have are, I'm quite sure, the result of much thought on the matter. To put him on ignore would do a disservice to gun rights as he has a lot of good information and has been a staunch supporter of gun rights with his own skin in the game.

 

[eye95]

...Because the one [Constitution] Im reading specifically states that the people have the right to abolish the government if their government is causing harm to the people...

Cite?

I know that is in the Declaration of Independence, but where is it in that Constitution that you read?

BTW, I am fully down with the ideas in the DOI. I am just not so ignorant as to believe that our government is so far gone as to risk the near certain and total tyranny that results from almost all revolutions. So I am still for using the means put forth in the Constitution for fixing unconstitutional problems without breaking laws, constitutional or otherwise.

I thought the owners of this site favored that idea too. The fact that they let this thread go on and folks like you advocate openly for the overthrow of our government still amazes me! But their site; their choice.

So I'll just move on to discussing this with other folks until you can find that "abolish the government" thing in the Constitution that you read.

 

[eye95]

I know eye95 personally and we have demonstrated side by side for open carry rights. Although I vehemently disagree with him on this point, I can think of few others that I'd trust to have my back in a pinch. I won't pretend to speak for him but if I were to guess, I'd say that Kokesh and this march have his jimmies rustled. Any strong thoughts he might have are, I'm quite sure, the result of much thought on the matter. To put him on ignore would do a disservice to gun rights as he has a lot of good information and has been a staunch supporter of gun rights with his own skin in the game.

Thank you for the kind words. We are proof that folks can disagree without making it personal. Some here are incapable of that.

I don't care if they put me on ignore. (I have a lengthy ignore list myself.) It is not they who I am trying to convince of anything. Their minds are made up, and their goal is merely to belittle any who disagree with them. My goal, OTOH, is to reach folks with yet open minds, folks who are reading here, looking for information on which to base a decision. They can either use the juvenile rants of some here who argue for the march by arguing against me as a person, or they can read my reasoning for being unabashedly against this illegal march.

To whom do you think that silent majority is most likely to listen? Some folks here need to seriously cogitate on that one.

But, then, I don't think that the stated goals of some are their real goals, some posters here, and Kokesh himself. He has made conflicting statements. Some about this event being peaceful, and then those in my signature. I truly believe that he wants to be remembered in history as the man who caused a second Shot. As I keep pointing out (mainly for the benefit of that silent majority), when the first Shot was fired, the representatives of the tyrants were marching on the People to disarm them. This time around, those marching on the tyrants are the instigators. That some do not see this HUGE distinction amazes me.

Again, though, thanks for rationally presenting the opinion in opposition to mine. Folks really should have your side of the argument presented in an adult manner--even if that means dissuading them is a tad more difficult than when I am only dealing with juvenile personal attacks.

 

[Tucker6900]

Thank you for the kind words. We are proof that folks can disagree without making it personal. Some here are incapable of that.

I don't care if they put me on ignore. (I have a lengthy ignore list myself.) It is not they who I am trying to convince of anything. Their minds are made up, and their goal is merely to belittle any who disagree with them. My goal, OTOH, is to reach folks with yet open minds, folks who are reading here, looking for information on which to base a decision. They can either use the juvenile rants of some here who argue for the march by arguing against me as a person, or they can read my reasoning for being unabashedly against this illegal march.

To whom do you think that silent majority is most likely to listen? Some folks here need to seriously cogitate on that one.

But, then, I don't think that the stated goals of some are their real goals, some posters here, and Kokesh himself. He has made conflicting statements. Some about this event being peaceful, and then those in my signature. I truly believe that he wants to be remembered in history as the man who caused a second Shot. As I keep pointing out (mainly for the benefit of that silent majority), when the first Shot was fired, the representatives of the tyrants were marching on the People to disarm them. This time around, those marching on the tyrants are the instigators. That some do not see this HUGE distinction amazes me.

Again, though, thanks for rationally presenting the opinion in opposition to mine. Folks really should have your side of the argument presented in an adult manner--even if that means dissuading them is a tad more difficult than when I am only dealing with juvenile personal attacks.

The simple fact that they are being called tyrants is reason enough. If "they" were not widely considered tyrants, then I would agree with you all the way.

 

[eye95]

This video was posted on DefendAlabama.com (IMO, the only true grassroots OC movement in Alabama). It prompted me to reply with what I believe to be the best answer to the question of if and when unlawful resistance to the government should start. Since this thread seems to be a no-long-gun-OC-and-no-advocacy-for-breaking-the-law-rule-free-zone, this is surely the place to repost the video and my response.

[video=youtube;OtpPgtbfpQA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtpPgtbfpQA&feature=player_embedded[/video]

I would like to answer Tom Diaz's question, "Who is it that you'd like to shoot?"

The same kind of people that prompted the first Shot Heard 'round the World: Those trying to oppress the People by marching on them with force to take their guns!

If and when that happens, the shooting will start in earnest--and I leave it to you to guess which way my AR-15 will be pointed. Until then, I advocate only for law-abiding means to fight for and restore our rights.

 

[WalkingWolf]

(snip) You could be next, or I could be next, simply for being a member of an open carry discussion board.

Apparently there is at least one member here that is OK with that...

 

[eye95]

The simple fact that they are being called tyrants is reason enough. If "they" were not widely considered tyrants, then I would agree with you all the way.

First of all, a cursory reading of what I write will reveal that the tyrants of which I write in this thread are the tyrants running the city of Washington, DC.

That being said, all government (including our federal government) is, to one extent or another, tyrannical. Power corrupts. If we were to respond to all tyranny, no matter the extent of it, with arms, we would be in a constant battle. We must measure our response based on the level of the tyranny, our ability to fix it through civil means, and the nature of the tyranny (specifically, whether the tyranny is designed to remove all ability to work against it).

At the moment, the tyranny coming from the federal government is not so extensive that it cannot be dealt with in the courts and at the ballot box, and its nature is not (yet) designed to remove all ability to work against it. Should the government start marching on the citizens to disarm them, then, YES, we would have arrived at a when-in-the-course-of-human-events moment. IMO, we have not yet arrived at such.

As a result, I will work to stop any effort that has the stated purpose of overthrowing our government (such as this march about which Kokesh has just such a stated goal) when I still believe that our government, as tyrannical as it has become, is still Liberty's last best hope.

If we have a revolution now, I am convinced that our government will be replaced with an absolute tyranny. History has taught us that lesson--at least to those of us willing to learn from history.


____________

On edit: I just remembered that you are the poster who claims that our Constitution allows for the abolition of the government and that I had moved on until you supported that assertion. Have you found that in the Constitution yet? Or are you mixing up the Constitution with the Declaration of Independence?

 

[Freedom First]

Eye,

What mechanism did the Framers leave us in the Constitution for dealing with an entrenched and lawless group of people who refuse to honor their Oath or to obey the laws of the land?

Just wondering what you solution to the above problem would look like. Thanks!

 

[WalkingWolf]

(snip)



Just wondering what you solution to the above problem would look like. Thanks!

I am guessing based on his posts, bend over and take it with a smile...