Oath Keepers To Arm 50 Black Protesters In Ferguson With AR- 15’s For Epic Rights Flexing March

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

http://www.mintpressnews.com/oath-keepers-to-arm-50-black-protesters-in-ferguson-with-ar-15s-for-epic-rights-flexing-march/208682/

FERGUSON (TFTP) The Missouri chapter of the Oath Keepers are planning to hold an open carry march through downtown Ferguson, Mo., which will reportedly involve arming 50 black protestors with AR-15 rifles.

The decision to hold the event transpired after St. Louis County officials, in violation of Missouri’s open carry law, insisted that members of the group could not open carry long barrel rifles within the city. In a video uploaded to YouTube, police chief Jon Belmar is seen warning a number of Oath Keepers that open carrying long barrel rifles would be a violation of the law.

“My only problem is with the long guns and inciting these guys out here,” Belmar said, referring to the Ferguson protesters.

When one of the men questioned Belmar regarding Missouri’s open carry law, he responded by saying, “I have attorneys. I didn’t go to law school. I get what you guys stand for and probably agree with most of it. All I’m trying to do is manage this thing.”

While trying to simply manage things is semi-understandable, it’s Belmar’s duty to assure that those he employs respect Missouri’s open carry law and the Constitutional rights’ of American citizens.

Head of the St. Louis County, Mo. Oath Keepers group, Sam Andrews called Belmar out for his blatant disregard of the law.

“He (Belmar) was thumbing his nose at the legislature of the State of Missouri. It was like he couldn’t give a ####### about the Bill of Rights or state law.”

Andrews told Red Dirt News that the march would be held in the next “couple of weeks,” as a means of demonstrating the veracity of Missouri’s open carry law to law enforcement.

Andrews explained that he and members of his group spent almost an entire night speaking with black protestors about the events in Ferguson and the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.

“Every person we talked to said if they carried they’d be shot by police. That’s the reason we’re going to hold this event and it will be a legal demonstration,” Andrews said. “I’m sick and tired of law enforcement who doesn’t think they have to abide by the law. They’re narcissistic and that guy (Belmar) discredited my men.”

Oath Keepers are made up mainly of current and former military and law enforcement officers who have sworn to place their oath to the Constitution ahead of any law or command given that violates the rights of the citizens.

[Janelle2002 3,865]

This will be interesting.

[TENBILLIONDOLLARS 216]

Freedom is within reach.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Having the right to open carry and availing yourself of that right in a near riot situation. What could go wrong?

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Having the right to open carry and availing yourself of that right in a near riot situation. What could go wrong?

Peaceful protests with armed protesters wouldn't be the issue as long as they screened folks who are showing up. Knuckleheads are the same no matter where you go. I know I wouldn't want to be armed in public. Not the way police now a days have been reacting...

[Sousuke 1,214]

Before I start, I want to say that I partially supported the people of Occupy. The line for me was shutting down major roads and highways.

So. In general, protests don't sway the minds within local or large governments; they can easily be ignored. Peaceful protests win by creating a critical mass of people that affectively "scares" governments into action to regain control of the situation. (Egypt was an example of this).

If you can't quite generate critical mass, then a government can quickly gain control of the situation and shut things down.

Occupy was an example of a movement that almost reached critical mass, but once it started to plateau in popularity, local governments were able to move in and break apart the movement.

Had the Occupy movement been partially armed, I think things would have been different. Governments would have been less likely to take action and start an incident. Had an incident occurred, you probably would have seen an Occupy victory.

If you look at the Civil Rights movement, the Black Panthers were instrumental in aiding the cause. They were armed and they protected people trying to vote etc but they weren't necessarily right out front of the movement

In summary, for a completely peaceful protest to change policy you need roughly 40-50% of the population involved. With regards to armed protests, that percentage drops precipitously.

Edited August 17, 2015 by Sousuke

[GandD 5,966]

Before I start, I want to say that I partially supported the people of Occupy. The line for me was shutting down major roads and highways.

So. In general, protests don't sway the minds within local or large governments; they can easily be ignored. Peaceful protests win by creating a critical mass of people that affectively "scares" governments into action to regain control of the situation. (Egypt was an example of this).

If you can't quite generate critical mass, then a government can quickly gain control of the situation and shut things down.

Occupy was an example of a movement that almost reached critical mass, but once it started to plateau in popularity, local governments were able to move in and break apart the movement.

Had the Occupy movement been partially armed, I think things would have been different. Governments would have been less likely to take action and start an incident. Had an incident occurred, you probably would have seen an Occupy victory.

If you look at the Civil Rights movement, the Black Panthers were instrumental in aiding the cause. They were armed and they protected people trying to vote etc but they weren't necessarily right out front of the movement

In summary, for a completely peaceful protest to change policy you need roughly 40-50% of the population involved. With regards to armed protests, that percentage drops precipitously.

I may not always agree with what you say but I nearly always appreciate your comments. You would think reasonable differing opinions wouldn't be this rare.

Edited August 18, 2015 by GandD