"Oath Keepers" Patrolling Protests with Semi-Automatic Rifles

  • Thread starter Thread starter GS 281
  • Start date Start date
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.
They would accomplish the same ends if they just stayed home, wouldn't they?
 
Well, they're there to act as bodyguards for a reporter from Info Wars. Alex Jones may be a nut but he and his employees are entitled to protection. Even if that wasn't the case, Ferguson isn't under martial law (yet), so I don't see why anyone who wants to participate in the protests that are happening there should feel obliged to just stay home.
 
Well, they're there to act as bodyguards for a reporter from Info Wars. Alex Jones may be a nut but he and his employees are entitled to protection. Even if that wasn't the case, Ferguson isn't under martial law (yet), so I don't see why anyone who wants to participate in the protests that are happening there should feel obliged to just stay home.
They're protecting businesses. Unless protecting business is suddenly racist, who cares.

You need to watch the actual police.
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.

dindu nuffin amirite
 
  • Agree
Reactions: niggers
knockout game

From what my father, who until recently worked closely with the police department in a fairly dangerous city, tells me, the knockout game is mostly an urban legend. The vast majority of the time a "knockout game" incident is reported, it's actually just a run-of-the-mill assault.
 
It's probably just Infowars trying to stir up drama, don't take it too seriously.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Clown Doll
i'm no lawyer but niggers can have guns too right? like you could have a piece too if it bugs you so bad. this is america. it's easier to find a gun than it is to find a fucking parking spot.

a protest of black people with assault rifles would probably grab more attention than a protest of black people with hashtags imo
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Big Nasty
i'm no lawyer but niggers can have guns too right? like you could have a piece too if it bugs you so bad. this is america. it's easier to find a gun than it is to find a fucking parking spot.

a protest of black people with assault rifles would probably grab more attention than a protest of black people with hashtags imo

Of course, they'd also all be shot. Or they'd drop a bomb on wherever they were, like they did in Philadelphia to the MOVE cultists, in the middle of a residential neighborhood, which ended up burning down the whole block.
 
i'm no lawyer but niggers can have guns too right? like you could have a piece too if it bugs you so bad. this is america. it's easier to find a gun than it is to find a fucking parking spot.

a protest of black people with assault rifles would probably grab more attention than a protest of black people with hashtags imo

This actually used to happen back in the day, and it worked:

Black Armed Guard
Alarmed at the violence that civil rights activities aroused, Williams had applied to the National Rifle Association for a charter for a local rifle club. He called the Monroe Chapter of the NRA the Black Armed Guard, made up of about 50-60 men, some veterans like Williams. They were determined to defend the local black community from racist attacks. Newtown was the black residential area.

In the summer of 1957 there were rumors that the KKK was going to attack the house of Dr. Albert Perry, a practicing physician and vice-president of the Monroe NAACP. Williams and his men of the Armed Guard went to Perry's house to defend it, fortifying it with sandbags. When numerous KKK members appeared and shot from their cars, Williams and his followers returned the fire, driving them away.[6]

"After this clash the same city officials who said the Klan had a constitutional right to organize met in an emergency session and passed a city ordinance banning the Klan from Monroe without a special permit from the police chief."[5]

In Negroes with Guns, Williams writes:

"[R]acist consider themselves superior beings and are not willing to exchange their superior lives for our inferior ones. They are most vicious and violent when they can practice violence with impunity."[7] He also wrote, "It has always been an accepted right of Americans, as the history of our Western states proves, that where the law is unable, or unwilling, to enforce order, the citizens can, and must act in self-defense against lawless violence."[8]

Followers attested to Williams' advocating the use of advanced powerful weaponry rather than more traditional firearms. Williams insisted his position was defensive, as opposed to a declaration of war. He relied on large numbers of black military veterans from the local area, as well as financial support from across the country. In Harlem, particularly, fundraisers were frequently held and proceeds devoted to purchasing arms for Williams and his followers. He called it "armed self-reliance" in the face of white terrorism. Threats against Williams' life and his family became more frequent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Williams#Black_Armed_Guard
 
The black panthers had guns so many in fact, that Reagan who was Governor of California at the time, signed gun control laws.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: HeirenPlaya
I am a gun owner myself, and I don't agree with the open carry thing at all. What's your point, anyway? To get the attention of the anti-gun, "progressive" biased media? It's only going to hurt your cause, and is an abuse of our rights and only ends up making us look like assholes.

If you really have to carry a firearm with you at all times, please be discreet. And as a side note, penis jokes when pertaining to firearms are old and unfunny.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Splendid and Marvin
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.

Agreed, they are a hostile terrorist group. Let's hope the OK spend the rest of their lives being waterboarded in camp X-ray where they belong.
 
Agreed, they are a hostile terrorist group. Let's hope the OK spend the rest of their lives being waterboarded in camp X-ray where they belong.
They're terrorists in that they use fear if force, threats of violence and intimidation to push their own politics onto others and frustrate the rule of law but they're not cut-your-head-off-and-stone-the-infidel type barbarians.

They should be broken up, disarmed the grunts fined and the ringleaders imprisioned or something similar but wishing torture on them is a bit much imo.
 
They're terrorists in that they use fear if force to push there own politics onto others and frustrate the rule of law but they're not cut-your-head-off-and-stone-the-infidel type barbarians.

Give it a year or two.

They should be broken up, disarmed the grunts fined and the ringleaders imprisioned or something similar but wishing torture on them is a bit much imo.

If it's legal for foreign terrorists then I see no reason to spare terrorists who are also traitors the same fate. If anyone disagrees than they need to work to get the law changed. Honestly I'd be happy with life imprisonment.

Since they're already actively resisting court orders and threatening violence who knows what else they're doing? They could be growing anthrax right now.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Marvin
Give it a year or two.



If it's legal for foreign terrorists then I see no reason to spare terrorists who are also traitors the same fate. If anyone disagrees than they need to work to get the law changed.

Since they're already actively resisting court orders and threatening violence who knows what else they're doing? They could be growing anthrax right now.
I take your point, but i don't think it was legal to do that to foreign prisoners.

Based on what they've done so far prison seems appropriate.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Marvin
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.

There are any number of reasons that these guys would claim that a court order they don't want to listen to isn't "lawful", probably resting on a particular reading of the constitution.

a protest of black people with assault rifles would probably grab more attention than a protest of black people with hashtags imo

Let's just imagine that all those protests we saw in Ferguson - the ones that were routinely decried as "going too far" and "distracting from the issues" - had featured a bunch of assault rifles. How would that have played?

It's no secret that for a sizeable demographic, a white guy with an AK is defending his constitutional rights, but a black guy with an AK is a gang-banger about to do a driveby.
 
There are any number of reasons that these guys would claim that a court order they don't want to listen to isn't "lawful", probably resting on a particular reading of the constitution.
They can claim what they like, determining what court orders and decisions are valid is a function of the higher courts which found against bundy continuously for 20+ years.

I'm sure they don't view themselves as terrorists but that is still what they are, the US definition of terrorism is: "the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives" (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85). And in the patriot act:
"activities that (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the U.S. or of any state; (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S."

Which is exactly what they did in nevada, threatening the government using coercion for a political purpose.
 
Back