"Oath Keepers" Patrolling Protests with Semi-Automatic Rifles

http://news.yahoo.com/oath-keepers-ferguson-michael-brown-protests-164305035.html

What good can come of this? If one of them fires a weapon, provoked or not, shit will hit the fan. This doesn't offer anything even close to productive.

 

[AnimuGinger]

Gotta keep those well respected Infowars reporters safe.

 

[Sweet and Savoury]

http://news.yahoo.com/oath-keepers-ferguson-michael-brown-protests-164305035.html

What good can come of this? If one of them fires a weapon, provoked or not, shit will hit the fan. This doesn't offer anything even close to productive.

I know I've said this before...

but what the fuck is wrong with Americans?

Tensions are at a breaking point, the media is egging everyone on and both sides are expecting the worst so "they" decide that the best thing to do is run around with assault weapons to try to "protect" the peace?

Christ...this will not end well.

 

[GS 281]

This is what a lot of them want. There are some who think they are protecting the country and don't know they are being manipulated or do not recognize the racism latent in their motives, but shit popping off and "knocking 'them' down a peg" is what they want.

 

[Marvin]

Jesus Christ, I hate open carry dipshits like this. These are the same kind of dumbasses who protest discrimination against open carry by hanging out in grocery stories with assault weapons. Great job dumbass, you're really making a persuasive argument to all the little old ladies and housewives with their toddlers trying to shop for groceries.

 

[melty]

I know I've said this before...

but what the fuck is wrong with Americans?

Tensions are at a breaking point, the media is egging everyone on and both sides are expecting the worst so "they" decide that the best thing to do is run around with assault weapons to try to "protect" the peace?

Christ...this will not end well.

Really I blame the media. They want to keep everyone in a constant state of agitation. So many issues have an unnatural split between them. For instance it used to be that you could have a presidential candidate getting 60% or 70% of the vote. But for the past few decades it's pretty much been around 50/50. Why is this? I don't think it's a coincidence.

 

[MrTroll]

I wouldn't go anywhere near Ferguson without an assault rifle either tbh.

 

[Dr. Boe Jangles Esq.]

Sadly, it's not even remotely shocking. People in Missouri love their guns, and we have some of the loosest firearm regulations in the US. No waiting periods, no registration, and a ridiculously lenient open carry policy means that it's pretty much open season. There's not a hell of a lot the police can do about it, because the law errs on the side of protecting peoples rights instead of common sense.

 

[XYZpdq]

Really I blame the media. They want to keep everyone in a constant state of agitation.

If people didn't tune in they wouldn't do it.
A few years ago dead and missing kids were all the rage, so they shoveled that shit nonstop.

In a year or two it'll be how sloths are being wiped out for the cure for deafness or autism bucks getting defunded after 2/3s of the population is diagnosed or something else as people's tastes change.

 

[Vitriol]

The oathkeepers are interesting as they were one of the main militia groups involved in the bundy fiasco.

for those who aren't aware Cliven Bundy was agentleman who used Nevada state ground for grazing since the 1990's and refused to pay for it despite damaging the land through over use and having no right to use the land at all. the case wound its way through the courts and by 2013 he had lost every time and owed millions in legal fees, grazing fees, and court fines.

Some US federal buraeu or other was authorised to seize the cattle and in response Bundy went full sovcit and called out the millitias. Literally hundreds answered his call and when the feds got out there they were met with hundreds of armed men many of whom deliberately had women and children in front of them. they had roadblocks and sniper positions set up in case the feds tried to force the issue like at waco 20 years ago.

the feds wisely backed down however as the millitias got bored and began to fall out and disperse there was a string of murders across the midwest caused by outcast militiamen with their blood up.

Just to reitrerate a militia led by the Oathkeepers successfully faced down the US gov and prevented the carrying out of a court order. The militia presense at the bundy farm didn't calm down or weaken untill their (the oathkeepers) leader got in some kind of tiff and led his men away. suggesting the oathkeepers were the main backbone of the force.

Further the oathkeepers are unusual amongst militias as they recruit exclusively from ex military and law enforcement.

I think its incredible that they haven't been labled a terrorist organisation as I'm fairly sure using guns to stop federal agents from enforcing a court order and threatening to shoot anyone who tries to stop you, while setting up illegal roadblocks all counts as terrorism in my book.

 

[GS 281]

Could you imagine if someone who was Muslim did the same as Bundy and he called on former members of the Iranian Army living in the US to help protect him the same as Bundy or a Black farmer doing the same as Bundy and then calling on members of the Black Guerrilla Family to help him? These Oath Keeper guys are even worse news than either of those groups. They are trained quite well and are highly capable of elegant, strategic military planning and tactical operations. I agree with Vitriol that they are a problem.

 

[I AM STRAIGHT!!!!]

lol at the idea that an Infowars reporter is in particular danger. Who's going to get him, a Rothschild Zionist agent?

Rather than getting angry I'm going to reframe this and encourage appreciating this as a interesting phenomenon to observe. If you claim to be a sciencey, rational type person, then this is a good time to do analysis rather than emotional reaction and side-taking.

It will be interesting to see which side the Oath Keepers come down on in the event of violence. Notice that they are taking the protesters' side while the protesters do not appreciate it and are using their presence to criticize police. For the moment O.K. seem to have the moral high ground: they're not shooting anyone nor protesting for some particular interest, they're keeping the peace. And although the police complain, they benefit from this.

On the other hand, a violent outburst will force O.K. to take sides and give something: shoot the police and give up legal high ground, shoot the protesters and give up anti-authority credibility, or shoot each other and give up organizational cohesion.

I'll point out that "black mob vs. authorities" picture that we see on display today does not coincide with the usual white-militant view, which is that the authorities use the black mob to oppress whites. It will be interesting to see white opinion evolve in the event that the O.K. turn on the police.

I think it's most likely though that O.K. will have the effect of lowering the temperature and keeping the peace. Realize that in any confrontation like this, both sides are attempting to score a "win", or at least a wash out in which both sides lose. Simply by being unpredictable, OK's presence means that neither protesters nor police can perceive a clear prospect of a "win". It remains possible that protesters will attempt to provoke them in order to apply blame to the police. But what if the police acted against the OK--would the protesters interfere? Probably not.

I think its incredible that they haven't been labled a terrorist organisation as I'm fairly sure using guns to stop federal agents from enforcing a court order and threatening to shoot anyone who tries to stop you, while setting up illegal roadblocks all counts as terrorism in my book.

This is an understandable view but it does not amount to legal case; the government can't prosecute people for terrorism because we don't like what they did with their right to assemble. The point of this angle is to frame the authorities as biased one way or other ("imagine if they were black or Muslim..."). It is as easy to say that the protesters are all terrorists ("What if they were Muslim? They'd all be jailed, so this is evidence that gov't favors blacks").

I am of the opinion that the feds are busy infiltrating, observing, and building a case against them that lets them use their strong suit: arrest sweep, prosecution, incarceration.

 

[CatParty]

@Cute Anime Girl

 

[Cute Anime Girl]

They're protecting businesses. Unless protecting business is suddenly racist, who cares.

You need to watch the actual police.

 

[Henry Bemis]

Jesus Christ, I hate open carry dipshits like this. These are the same kind of dumbasses who protest discrimination against open carry by hanging out in grocery stories with assault weapons. Great job dumbass, you're really making a persuasive argument to all the little old ladies and housewives with their toddlers trying to shop for groceries.

My two cents in how to solve the open-carry dealio in the country: Replace all instances of "guns, rifles, etc" with "fake metal penises."

As in, "The National Fake Metal Penis Association." Or "The open-carry activists walked into the restaurant with their fake metal penises on their chests"

 

[Vitriol]

lol at the idea that an Infowars reporter is in particular danger. Who's going to get him, a Rothschild Zionist agent?

Rather than getting angry I'm going to reframe this and encourage appreciating this as a interesting phenomenon to observe. If you claim to be a sciencey, rational type person, then this is a good time to do analysis rather than emotional reaction and side-taking.

It will be interesting to see which side the Oath Keepers come down on in the event of violence. Notice that they are taking the protesters' side while the protesters do not appreciate it and are using their presence to criticize police. For the moment O.K. seem to have the moral high ground: they're not shooting anyone nor protesting for some particular interest, they're keeping the peace. And although the police complain, they benefit from this.

On the other hand, a violent outburst will force O.K. to take sides and give something: shoot the police and give up legal high ground, shoot the protesters and give up anti-authority credibility, or shoot each other and give up organizational cohesion.

I'll point out that "black mob vs. authorities" picture that we see on display today does not coincide with the usual white-militant view, which is that the authorities use the black mob to oppress whites. It will be interesting to see white opinion evolve in the event that the O.K. turn on the police.

I think it's most likely though that O.K. will have the effect of lowering the temperature and keeping the peace. Realize that in any confrontation like this, both sides are attempting to score a "win", or at least a wash out in which both sides lose. Simply by being unpredictable, OK's presence means that neither protesters nor police can perceive a clear prospect of a "win". It remains possible that protesters will attempt to provoke them in order to apply blame to the police. But what if the police acted against the OK--would the protesters interfere? Probably not.



This is an understandable view but it does not amount to legal case; the government can't prosecute people for terrorism because we don't like what they did with their right to assemble. The point of this angle is to frame the authorities as biased one way or other ("imagine if they were black or Muslim..."). It is as easy to say that the protesters are all terrorists ("What if they were Muslim? They'd all be jailed, so this is evidence that gov't favors blacks").

I am of the opinion that the feds are busy infiltrating, observing, and building a case against them that lets them use their strong suit: arrest sweep, prosecution, incarceration.

resisting the enforcement of a court order by the threat of violence and outright stating that they will shoot any federal officer who attempts to enforce such an order is well beyond right to assemble.

I'm sure you are quite right about them being infiltrated so as to be more easily taken apart but i really stuggle to see how one would come to the conclusion that using the threat of armed force to prevent the execution of a lawful court order is anything but terrorism or some similar crime against society.

 

[HeirenPlaya]

I'm a Black man and in favor of gun rights. The more those that would like to see me dead embrace their gun rights, the more I want to embrace mine in order to defend myself, my home, my possessions, my family, and dare I say, my endeavors. I honestly don't beleive that America can continue down this path, and it does seem liek shit is going to hit the fan in more ways than one.

Maybe Tyce was right all along...

 

[Tranhuviya]

 

[GS 281]

They're protecting businesses. Unless protecting business is suddenly racist, who cares.

You need to watch the actual police.

I don't think it matters if they or their acts are racist at this point. These Black citizens are seeing mainly White people who aren't affiliated with the government going into their community with high-powered weaponry.

I agree that you need to be mindful of the actual police but these idiots from the Oath Keepers are not being very smart, either.

 

[MrTroll]

I agree that you need to be mindful of the actual police but these idiots from the Oath Keepers are not being very smart, either.

They're not gonna get car-jacked or end up an unwitting participant in the knockout game anyway. I'd say that's pretty smart.