So, all the pro 2A rallies yesterday are over. Was there any acts of violence

[Hoopla Phil]

perpetrated by these groups yesterday? I read lots of predictions of it, and some very disturbing people wished for it and joking about firecrackers, but I have not read of any. Have any of you?

[elocs]

1. I don't think the point was for acts of violence. The threat of intimidation was quite clear.

That was the point.

So, is today a furlough day from the gungeon?

[havocmom]

I think some of them were hoping to be confronted so they would have an excuse to fight

They were hoping the mythical 'gun grabbers'* would show up and try to persecute them

* mods, I know the term is forbidden here, but I am not using it to describe any real people, just the delusions some of the wingers have about DEMS in general. I hope the difference in reason for use of the term will allow this post to remain.

[tburnsten]

6. Doubt it

The goal of the people who participate in these kinds of demonstrations is mainly to try to desensitize people to the idea that only cops and robbers have guns, in some small areas of the country that is generally the case by legislative fiat, but for the most part, the nation has tons of perfectly peaceful, honest gun owners.

I think it's an unfortunate coincidence that many of the people who decide this is a good way to achieve that goal happen to also be members of the limited government camp, though it isn't particularly surprising given the tendency towards independence that firearms owners display.

[havocmom]

13. I agree with you for most participants, but personally know some with chips on shoulders

just looking for some to try and knock if off so they can go off on them

Full Disclosure: I am most assuredly pro-2nd Amendment and own guns.

[tburnsten]

14. Sweet.

Wouldn't catch me dead at one of those silly rallies, I just also majorly disapprove of demonizing or patronizing fellow citizens, even if their approach to a protest isn't perfect.


I think it's funny as well that some people apparently have the power to measure someone's member via a clothed photo or a written post.

[gorfle]

15. Threats of intimidation.

How about hanging people in effigy. What is your stance on that?

[paulsby]

23. it wasn't clear at all

i am not intimidated by people lawfully carrying weapons

in fact, i work with a group of people who ALL lawfully carry weapons

if you are intimidated, that's YOUR problem

[tortoise1956]

48. Good point, Paulsby

An historical note: I was stationed overseas in the early 1980's, and had the pleasure of spending 18 months on the island of La Maddalena, of the coast of Corsica. One thing I noticed very quickly was that it wasn't uncommon to see Italian men carrying luparas, a long-barreled shotgun, around in public. They weren't brandishing them, and no one seemed to pay any attention to them as it was considered part of the culture.

The irony is that it wasn't that long ago that carrying firearms, both here in America and even in Britain, was not out of the ordinary. In my opinion, the move away started in the last century when the country's population became more urban than rural, and guns were no longer a part of ordinary life. I learned about guns and gun safety from my father, who grew up in rural Ohio in the 20's and 30's. He taught me that guns are a tool, and that they were not to be used casually or improperly.

Frankly, I think that the idea of making gun safety classes available (as an OPTION) in schools would help to remove the mystique. Once you understand something, you don't fear it. Whether or not you like the NRA, they are still the best organization around when it comes to providing firearms education. It worked for me 45 years ago, and I bet it is still worthwhile today.

OK, I'm done. Standing by for the flames to begin...

[SteveM]

41. I was so intimidated, I slept through most of it. How many were there?

[Ron Green]

2. It seems there weren't many people at this event, at least from reports I've seen.

They're very much a fringe group, with LOTS of eyes on them.

[X_Digger]

3. *gasp* you mean blood wasn't running down the mall?

The protesters were well-behaved, even to the counter-protesters.

[crim son]

4. Haven't heard anything either.

Of course, violence with guns is a far more serious affair than violence with signs and placards. Even these dipshits appear to understand that.

[zipplewrath]

5. Nope, didn't need them at all

No a single need for a weapon at any of those rallies.

[tburnsten]

7. There are many uses for firearms that don't include violence

or are legitimate applications of force, in this case I believe what they were trying to do was to try to convey that gun owners are absolutely ordinary people, not the bunch of fake Rambos many make them out to be.

Gotta remember, in a few select parts of the country only cops and robbers have guns, while in the rest of the country any non-felon without a history of domestic abuse is a little more likely than not to be a gun owner.

[zipplewrath]

8. I think you give them too much credit

I suspect the vast majority that brought them, did so out of a sense of "because I can" and because they wanted to be provocative. A bit similar to various nude and topless protests. If their intent was to project any sense of "ordinary" they failed badly.

[tburnsten]

9. Oh provocative was certainly the goal

And they achieved it quite well I'd say.

[zipplewrath]

10. In a nutty way

They achieved looking like a bunch of McVeigh wanna bees.

[spin]

16. The media portrayed them in that manner ...

not surprising.

I didn't see any interviews with any nutty people. I'm sure the media tried to entice some fool into saying something stupid. They must have failed.

[zipplewrath]

18. I didnt' see any interviews

I just saw a photo of a guy walking with a rifle over his shoulder. I just rolled my eyes. He either wasn't expecting a crowd, or hand no real use for the weapon. A bolt action rifle with a long barrel isn't exactly my first choice for a crowded situation.

[spin]

19. If just one interview would have uncovered some fool ...

saying crazy things, it would have been plastered all over the media and would be the topic of discussion today.

Remember this picture?



I see photoshopped images of this character everywhere. He has almost become another tourist guy.

[SteveM]

43. Yes. Probably more posts about demonstrators on DU than demonstrators.

[PavePusher]

28. Isn't that the point of any public demonstration...

no matter what the cause/politics?

I guess it's only O.K. to use your First Amendment Rights if you are one of the Chosen. Or something. Whatever.

[zipplewrath]

29. Okay or effective?

Okay is one thing. Being ineffective is another.

[SteveM]

42. How many were there with guns? I lost count. nt

[onehandle]

11. Who predicted that? These out of shape, middle-aged creampuffs can barely wheeze their way outside.

The day they try to 'take the government,' I will laugh as they are squished by tanks like grapes.

It's the quiet guy in the back or the guy who didn't make it that we have to worry about.

He took 'McVeigh Day' seriously and is making plans.

[tburnsten]

12. What the fuck is this "McVeigh Day" you keep blathering about?

Is it a new national holiday or something?

Or is it just for people to gloat and gleefully imagine their fellow countrymen slaughtered by Soldiers with tanks and things?

[Caliman73]

17. Agreed

Funny how some people who are vociferous in their opposition to gun ownership purport glee about violence. Projection is alive and well.

[spin]

20. In General Discussion a poster suggested ...

organizing a militia gathering and using artillery and air strikes to kill the members. I can only hope he was joking.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8178455&mesg_id=8183392

[Caliman73]

22. Wow.

I have my own opinions about the militias and "patriot movement" as well as some of the open carry rallies, but advocating violence is ridiculous. I guess violence is okay, but lawfully and peacefully possessing a firearm is not.

[onehandle]

34. So why didn't you report them?

I followed your link, reported them and the post was deleted a few minutes later.

[spin]

36. I have never reported anyone ...

nor do I intend to start.

I have to admit that the closest I ever came was the post that you reported and was deleted.

I also don't put people on ignore and I have only used unrec a few times.

[Pavulon]

24. He is depressed because his pet cause is being discarded by the parties

like jim crow and other dixiecrat ideals gun control is falling off the platform.

[onehandle]

31. Tell it like it is, Rosa Parks! nt

[Pavulon]

33. "Wrap it up B" your done. You have a supreme court

decision to look forward to to overturn bullshit local laws and more bills from congress to make CCW a national standard. Enjoy.

[SteveM]

45. I'll raise you one Fanny Lou Hamer.

She was armed. You know, shotgun in every corner. Think she was "pudgy" enough to get out?

[Hoopla Phil]

26. Why would you "laugh as they are squished by tanks like grapes"? You seem to revel

in the imaginary horrific death's of Americans. Why do you glorify such violence?

[onehandle]

30. What should the government do with an armed anti-American insurrection?

Take them to Starbucks?

[Hoopla Phil]

32. That does not answer any of my questions. I'll repeat.

Why would you "laugh as they are squished by tanks like grapes"? You seem to revel
in the imaginary horrific death's of Americans. Why do you glorify such violence?

[dmallind]

39. 58% of DU poll respondents predicted that

And what is it with idiots who think you need to be "in (media-prescribed) shape" in order to be able to shoot straight?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=8108810

[Hoopla Phil]

47. I wonder if that DU member participated in that poll? Hummmm. . .

[SteveM]

44. Why, were you stuck in between them? You know... enjoying the moment.

[one-eyed fat man]

49. These must just have you tickled shitless..........

Hungary, 1956?



Czechoslovakia, 1968?

http://www.popartuk.com/g/l/lgpp0893+the-unknown-rebel-tiananmen-square-june-5th-1989-poster.jpg

Tienanmen Square, 1989?



Mount Carmel Center, Waco, Texas, 1993?

[cowman]

50. I suspect that

you yourself have never seen combat, I further suspect that you are one of those "out of shape middleaged creampuffs" who has no clue what a bunch of rag tag militia can do to a modern army, just ask the Iraqis, and the Afghanis. Wanting to see fellow americans being squished by tanks is very offensive to most people.

[jeepnstein]

21. Of course not.

Did anyone really expect any? I'll say that most of the people at those rallies have no intention of ever shooting someone if they can help it at all. They have a cause they feel passionately about and are starting to exercise their First Amendment right to protect their Second Amendment right. They don't look any dumber or weirder than some of the folks I see at rallies for traditional progressive causes.

Of course we all know that some whacko will do something criminally insane within the next few years. Opponents of the 2nd Amendment are hoping it happens sooner rather than later. A few more years like we've seen lately and the gun control agenda is going to be as popular as Prohibition.

[Permanut]

25. Because I can?

I've seen that reasoning over and over - I'm packin' heat "because I can". And that reasoning borders on bizarre. I can paint myself purple and whistle Dixie in the town square if I want, but how in the heck is that a reason to do it?

[oneshooter]

51. Why do you vote? Because you can? That is no sound reason. n/t

[Katya Mullethov]

52. So are you gonna vote

Or are you just gonna stand there and whistle Dixie ?

[PavePusher]

53. If you know how to read...

I sure hope you don't do it unless you have a really good reason that both I and the government approve of.

[PavePusher]

27. There was considerably less violence and property damage than the average G-8 protests.

i.e., NONE.

Yet gun owners are portrayed as the violent, blood-thirsty ones.

Go figure.

[havocmom]

35. Aren't G-8 protests generally a tad larger too?

Just a ]i\tad:shrug:

[PavePusher]

37. I would think the size of a protest does not have a direct link to...

capacity for, or likelyhood of, violence.

But there certainly seems to be a trend in correlation to political leanings of the crowd.

[havocmom]

38. Size matters

in group dynamics

[PavePusher]

46. To an extent, yes.

But is it a contributing factor to violence? Or are other social factors the greater controllers? The only U.S. "right wing" demonstrations that I can recall becoming completely uncontrollable have all been held by actual racist groups, neo-nazis and the like. Even anti-abortion demonstrations rarely become violent.

[Katya Mullethov]

40. The Garbage Gap

For yet more insight it is quite easy to simply observe the garbage on the ground , or the complete lack thereof .