Gun Protesters Plan March On Washington With Loaded Rifles To...

For some reason, I can't help but think that one day all those dunmesswivmahgunz nutjobs are going to rebel against the US government, any government, democrat or republican and, ironically enough, most of you are going to wish that your government could go all Bashar al-Assad on their asses so you can go back to living your lives. 

to an outside observer, americans must be out of their minds..comp_atkins

They'll be arrested for violating the gun laws in DC. SAGE_OF_FIRE

If they end up getting anywhere near the 10,000 people they want to have participating, good luck.  

[QUOTE="SAGE_OF_FIRE"]They'll be arrested for violating the gun laws in DC. hartsickdiscipl

If they end up getting anywhere near the 10,000 people they want to have participating, good luck.  

Well, there is no way that will end well. I really don't think that is a way to get a point across.

Well, there is no way that will end well. I really don't think that is a way to get a point across.

Deadpool-n

to an outside observer, americans must be out of their minds..comp_atkins

I don't think that this protest is the best way to get the point across.  However, I do think that the vast majority of people (at least in the US) have been turned into establishment-programmed drones.  They don't understand just how evil Washington has gotten, and that these are desperate times.  Some of us want to keep them from getting more desperate.  The citizens don't need more laws, or even some of the ones we already have.  The politicians need more laws for themselves.  

I don't think that this protest is the best way to get the point across. However, I do think that the vast majority of people (at least in the US) have been turned into establishment-programmed drones. They don't understand just how evil Washington has gotten, and that these are desperate times. Some of us want to keep them from getting more desperate. The citizens don't need more laws, or even some of the ones we already have. The politicians need more laws for themselves.

hartsickdiscipl

Guess Decarte was wrong about you being.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="SAGE_OF_FIRE"]They'll be arrested for violating the gun laws in DC. DroidPhysX

If they end up getting anywhere near the 10,000 people they want to have participating, good luck.

... Actually if anything military will be involved.. If 10,000 armed people marching in Watching D.C. isn't a serious threat to national security, then I don't know what is..

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

I don't think that this protest is the best way to get the point across. However, I do think that the vast majority of people (at least in the US) have been turned into establishment-programmed drones. They don't understand just how evil Washington has gotten, and that these are desperate times. Some of us want to keep them from getting more desperate. The citizens don't need more laws, or even some of the ones we already have. The politicians need more laws for themselves.

MakeMeaSammitch

Guess Decarte was wrong about you being.

Crab-people.. Not lizardmen.

I don't think that this protest is the best way to get the point across.  However, I do think that the vast majority of people (at least in the US) have been turned into establishment-programmed drones.  They don't understand just how evil Washington has gotten, and that these are desperate times.  Some of us want to keep them from getting more desperate.  The citizens don't need more laws, or even some of the ones we already have.  The politicians need more laws for themselves.  

hartsickdiscipl

They can take my guns when they pry them from my cold, wet hands.

This is a much better idea.

they're going to get their gun privileges taken from them, then the government WILL really take their guns away, but only theirs, because they're idiotslamprey263

they're going to get their gun privileges taken from them, then the government WILL really take their guns away, but only theirs, because they're idiotslamprey263

I'm not ok with "the government" taking away people's right to bear arms if they participate in a peaceful protest.  I just hope this whole thing doesn't get out of hand.  I respect what Adam Kokesh stands for, but I'm not sure this is the best way to go about it.  

[QUOTE="lamprey263"]they're going to get their gun privileges taken from them, then the government WILL really take their guns away, but only theirs, because they're idiotshartsickdiscipl

I'm not ok with "the government" taking away people's right to bear arms if they participate in a peaceful protest.  I just hope this whole thing doesn't get out of hand.  I respect what Adam Kokesh stands for, but I'm not sure this is the best way to go about it.  

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="lamprey263"]they're going to get their gun privileges taken from them, then the government WILL really take their guns away, but only theirs, because they're idiotsPerson0

I'm not ok with "the government" taking away people's right to bear arms if they participate in a peaceful protest.  I just hope this whole thing doesn't get out of hand.  I respect what Adam Kokesh stands for, but I'm not sure this is the best way to go about it.  

There are going to be quite a few police officers among the protestors.  This could get interesting.  

I can't believe I have to wait almost a month for this. Can they switch the date to this weekend?

[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

 

I'm not ok with "the government" taking away people's right to bear arms if they participate in a peaceful protest.  I just hope this whole thing doesn't get out of hand.  I respect what Adam Kokesh stands for, but I'm not sure this is the best way to go about it.  

hartsickdiscipl

There are going to be quite a few police officers among the protestors.  This could get interesting.  

Oh wait....

[QUOTE="lamprey263"]they're going to get their gun privileges taken from them, then the government WILL really take their guns away, but only theirs, because they're idiotshartsickdiscipl

I'm not ok with "the government" taking away people's right to bear arms if they participate in a peaceful protest.  I just hope this whole thing doesn't get out of hand.  I respect what Adam Kokesh stands for, but I'm not sure this is the best way to go about it.  

You're making this less about protesting something, and more about you being to stupid to understand the issues.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="lamprey263"]they're going to get their gun privileges taken from them, then the government WILL really take their guns away, but only theirs, because they're idiotsMakeMeaSammitch

I'm not ok with "the government" taking away people's right to bear arms if they participate in a peaceful protest.  I just hope this whole thing doesn't get out of hand.  I respect what Adam Kokesh stands for, but I'm not sure this is the best way to go about it.  

You're making this less about protesting something, and more about you being to stupid to understand the issues.

In other words... "Look at my big d!ck everyone! It isn't small, see! I'm waving it around!"

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

 

I'm not ok with "the government" taking away people's right to bear arms if they participate in a peaceful protest.  I just hope this whole thing doesn't get out of hand.  I respect what Adam Kokesh stands for, but I'm not sure this is the best way to go about it.  

lo_Pine

You're making this less about protesting something, and more about you being to stupid to understand the issues.

[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

 

I'm not ok with "the government" taking away people's right to bear arms if they participate in a peaceful protest.  I just hope this whole thing doesn't get out of hand.  I respect what Adam Kokesh stands for, but I'm not sure this is the best way to go about it.  

hartsickdiscipl

There are going to be quite a few police officers among the protestors.  This could get interesting.  

[QUOTE="lo_Pine"][QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]They never did. 

You're making this less about protesting something, and more about you being to stupid to understand the issues.

Person0

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

 

I'm not ok with "the government" taking away people's right to bear arms if they participate in a peaceful protest.  I just hope this whole thing doesn't get out of hand.  I respect what Adam Kokesh stands for, but I'm not sure this is the best way to go about it.  

lo_Pine

You're making this less about protesting something, and more about you being to stupid to understand the issues.

[QUOTE="lo_Pine"][QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]They never did. 

You're making this less about protesting something, and more about you being to stupid to understand the issues.

MakeMeaSammitch

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="lo_Pine"] It's not about being too stupid to understand, it's about living in a place that has nothing better to do than to get mad about the 'war against the second amendment' that is actually not happening and will never happen. The United States government will NEVER take away US citizens guns as they have not taken away any of the original liberties the Bill of Rights gives Americans.lo_Pine

at the time the U.S. didn't have much of a military so that was written so that in the case of a war, a military could be build up much more quickly if people already had guns. 

Obviously that has no value today as we have the most powerful military by far.

[QUOTE="lo_Pine"][QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]the second amendment doesn't give any normal citizen the right to bear arms in it's original form.

MakeMeaSammitch

at the time the U.S. didn't have much of a military so that was written so that in the case of a war, a military could be build up much more quickly if people already had guns. 

Obviously that has no value today as we have the most powerful military by far.

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="lo_Pine"] The second amendment states: "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 right of the people' means every citizen of the USA has the right to bear arms just as 'the people' are defined in The Constitution, "We the people of the United States..."lo_Pine

at the time the U.S. didn't have much of a military so that was written so that in the case of a war, a military could be build up much more quickly if people already had guns. 

Obviously that has no value today as we have the most powerful military by far.

That does not change the originial purpose of the second amendment.

[QUOTE="lo_Pine"][QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]if you're in a miltia.

at the time the U.S. didn't have much of a military so that was written so that in the case of a war, a military could be build up much more quickly if people already had guns. 

Obviously that has no value today as we have the most powerful military by far.

MakeMeaSammitch

That does not change the originial purpose of the second amendment.

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="lo_Pine"] Well neither you or I are Supreme Court Justices and obviously, in the history of the United States the Supreme Court has not ruled that the phrase of the Second Amendment that refers to a militia means that the rest of the Second Amendment restricts the right to bear arms to a militia. Personally, I do not feel as qualified enough to assume that I do not know the law as much as dozens of Ivy League graduates of the Supreme Court justices who have pondered the Second Amendment more than I.lo_Pine

That does not change the originial purpose of the second amendment.

[QUOTE="lo_Pine"][QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]if you're in a miltia.

at the time the U.S. didn't have much of a military so that was written so that in the case of a war, a military could be build up much more quickly if people already had guns. 

Obviously that has no value today as we have the most powerful military by far.

MakeMeaSammitch

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="lo_Pine"] Well neither you or I are Supreme Court Justices and obviously, in the history of the United States the Supreme Court has not ruled that the phrase of the Second Amendment that refers to a militia means that the rest of the Second Amendment restricts the right to bear arms to a militia. Personally, I do not feel as qualified enough to assume that I do not know the law as much as dozens of Ivy League graduates of the Supreme Court justices who have pondered the Second Amendment more than I.Master_Live

The constitution is constantly evolving; that is not opinion, that is fact!

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="lo_Pine"] The second amendment states: "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 right of the people' means every citizen of the USA has the right to bear arms just as 'the people' are defined in The Constitution, "We the people of the United States..."thegerg

at the time the U.S. didn't have much of a military so that was written so that in the case of a war, a military could be build up much more quickly if people already had guns. 

Obviously that has no value today as we have the most powerful military by far.

yeah because going against the law and marching on washington with loaded rifles is a great way to prove you are responsible with firearms and that they shouldn't be banned.

Don't take your guns to town, son.

They can't legally protest in DC without a permit so expect the whole lot of them to be arrested when they show up. If it turns into a gunfight between them and law officials they'll have started it and the entire country is going to notice how stupid these kinds of wannabe revolutionaries are.